Encoded video keep making these weird effect

[greator]

Hi all, can someone help me?

I'm trying to encode a video (making it a smaller size than the original that i download from internet) using Xmedia Recode 3.5.2.4. The resulting video ended with these weird jaggy horizontal effect on moving object.



I didn't change anything from the default setting in the software other than changing the bitrate number to something smaller than the video bitrate. In this case the source video is 3000 kbps and i'm encoding it down to variable 1000kbps max to min 800kbps. The source video doesn't have this jaggy horizontal effect, but indeed it is smoother looking video than the encoded one.

Is there something in the setting that i need to change to remove this effect? It makes it very hard to watch the video and is very visible . Help please.
Thank you.

[JosephTocco]

So low bitrate is good for materials from '30-'60. Here you have dynamic scenes, it looks originally compressed in low quality, when you remove rest of data, you got this. IMO.

[greator]

The source video have this smooth soap opera like movement even though it is only 30fps (29.970). I keep the framerate as original in the encoder.
Most Japanese DVD from TV show does that.
I can't find a way to keep those smooth effect in xmedia recode. Or at least just remove that jaggy horizontal lines.

[ProWo]

Cut a 30 sec part with avidemux and post it here

[jagabo]

The video is interlaced. You need to encode it interlaced or deinterlace it before encoding it progressive.

[greator]

Cut a 30 sec part with avidemux and post it here

here it is
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fd5QLnMItIlXKN4cM_Zod3fKa9wGK7A0/view?usp=sharing

The video is interlaced. You need to encode it interlaced or deinterlace it before encoding it progressive.

I don't know where the setting is in Xmedia Recode. I see Display mode option set as "Progressive" as default, but there's also Interlace TFF & BFF. What's the difference?

[greator]

Ummm still need some help here please?

[jagabo]

Your link doesn't work for me. I just get a Google login page. Once I log in I have to request access.

[greator]

Your link doesn't work for me. I just get a Google login page. Once I log in I have to request access.

Sorry about that. I fixed it now.

[jagabo]

Your video is definitely interlaced. I don't use Xmedia Recode but this might help:
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/338380-How-to-set-deinterlace-in-XMedia-Recode

[ProWo]

Try this Avisynth script:

lwlibavvideosource("O:\samples\Mecha.Mecha.Iketeru .2018-03-31.Part1.The.Final.Episode.720p.HDTV.x264.AAC.mkv" )
TFM()
AssumeFPS(24000,1001)

[jagabo]

If you use TFM() you will lose half of the motion smoothness. If using AviSynth useYadif(mode=1) or QTGMC() instead.

By the way, the video is named "720p" but it's 1440x1080i.

[jagabo]

I just looked a XMedia Recode and it does support deinterlacing on the Filters/Preview tab. Enable the Deinterlace filter, set it toe Yadif, Bob, Temporal & Spacial Check. On the Video tab set the frame rate 59.94.

[greator]

I just looked a XMedia Recode and it does support deinterlacing on the Filters/Preview tab. Enable the Deinterlace filter, set it toe Yadif, Bob, Temporal & Spacial Check. On the Video tab set the frame rate 59.94.

Why 59.94? The source is 29.97. Isn't the filesize going to be huge?

[jagabo]

I just looked a XMedia Recode and it does support deinterlacing on the Filters/Preview tab. Enable the Deinterlace filter, set it toe Yadif, Bob, Temporal & Spacial Check. On the Video tab set the frame rate 59.94.

Why 59.94? The source is 29.97. Isn't the filesize going to be huge?

Interlaced video contains two separate half-pictures in each frame, called fields. This is why you see "comb" artifacts when you view them as frames. Each field is intended to be viewed separately and sequentially. So a 29.97 frame per second interlaced video is intended to be viewed as 59.94 fields per second. A "double frame rate deinterlace" turns each field into a full frame keeping all the smooth motion. If you use a "single frame rate deinterlace" you lose half the motion smoothness -- the video becomes a jerky and flickery.

Your goal of reducing the video to 1000 kbps is ill conceived in my opinion. The video is already way over-compressed. Reducing the bitrate even more is just going to make it look worse.

[aedipuss]

ehh? interlaced video is supposed to be viewed on a crt with every other line scanning. the phosphors on the tube keep the previous scan line long enough for the second to be shown.

no individual field was ever to be shown.

[jagabo]

ehh? interlaced video is supposed to be viewed on a crt with every other line scanning. the phosphors on the tube keep the previous scan line long enough for the second to be shown.

If you've ever looked a high speed (hundreds of thousands of fps) photography of a CRT TV you would see that the phosphors fade almost immediately. By the time the very next scan line of the field is being drawn (about 64 microseconds later) the previous scan line has almost completely faded away. You can see it in this high speed video at about 3 minutes an 34 seconds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BJU2drrtCM

no individual field was ever to be shown.

You're right, in a sense. Only a small portion of a single scan line was lit at any point in time. Your eyes/brain that are too slow to see that, and give the impression of a full picture.

[aedipuss]

back in the day there were short, medium, and long persistence phosphors...

[jagabo]

back in the day there were short, medium, and long persistence phosphors...

None of them glowed as long as a video field. Actually, some did but where not used on any TV. For example the original IBM monochrome CRT for the IBM PC use a long persistence green phosphor. It looked great with still images like looking at static text. But once the text started scrolling it was horrendous. You couldn't read anything until the scrolling stopped. I programmed on one back in those days so I was very familiar with it.

[greator]

So I'll just do deinterlace with 60fps right?
For "Display mode" I just keep them as 'Progressive"?

[jagabo]

For real interlaced material (like your sample in post #6) you want 60p. But for film based material you usually want to inverse telecine back to 24p.