is interlace at 480 the same as non at 480??

[alucard2050]

if i capture at 480x480 with the Huffy codec this captures both fields correct? now when i encode i use the deinterlace option for makeing a standard VCD. when i deinterlace does that put it at 480x240 since i'm loseing half the lines? i encode at 480x480 but with the deinterlace option would it be the same as encodeing 480x240? also, what if i just captured at 480x240 would i still have to deinterlace even while useing the Huffy codec? remember i'm makeing standard VCD's not SVCD's....thanks........

[alucard2050]

I posted this a couple days ago but maybe no one saw it at the time but now I have something to add to it so i hope this doesn't place me in the catagory of bumbping it to the top, since a couple days have past and my new topic relates to the first post...if i encode useing the standard template for a SVCD that comes with TMPGE..would the quality be better since its MPEG2 interlaced...i tested it and yes the quality was better at least as far as a crisper picture but i noticed alot more of a ghost during movements than i do with the VCD'S i make.......i played with the TMPGE filters for this but how can i tell whats better with just a still from the clip? maybe someone will have some suggestions.....thanks.........

[C53248]

If you deinterlace your 480, then outputting to 480 rather than 240 won't gain you anything. Deinterlacing kills half of the resolution either by eliminating every other line or by blending every two lines.

If the source was originally produced at 24 fps, e.g. any movie, then you should use inverse telecine to convert the 30 fps back to 24fps. This eliminates the interlace in a way that allows you to either keep the (real) 480 resolution or reduce it to 240 for a standard VCD. The 240 version after IVTC will have smoother motion than the 240 made by deinterlacing.

If the source was produced at 30 fps, then encoding it for an interlaced SVCD is probably the best option.

The ghosting is probably caused by comb effects. You could try changing the field order on TMPGEnc's Advanced tab. That's one possible culprit.

[D_Knife]

i capture at 480x480...remember i'm makeing standard VCD's not SVCD's

Why are you capturing at 480 horizontal then if your only doing VCD?
you should be capturing at either 352 or 704 (720 if DVD)

[alucard2050]

i use 480 because i think the image is better at 480 than 352...what i really want to do is get into svcd because its supposedly better than vcd but like i said the ghosting effect was really bad. the picture was great but any movement had ghosting bad. that was something that i never had a problem with when makeing vcd's or actually i should say xvcd's...here's what i've been doing, capturing with huffyuv codec at 480x480 from satellite..then i use tmpge to encode. 480x480, 1600cbr, highest setting for motion, noise reduction, deinterlace...my vcd's actually are really good but now i'm board and going for more..both my portable and standalone dvd players support svcd at the same settings but with vcd's my portable can't handle what my standalone can so i have to encode the same clips twice for two different vcd's.....anyway, i think i'll try the field order now...i love the svcd picture its just the ghost i hate....also when i capture i can only go as high as 480x480......thanks.............

[fly]

Well, I have been capturing analog AVI at 640 by 480 and then using TMPGEng to produce VCD files with great success just using the default template. Lately I use TMPGEng to produce SVCD. it is cristal clear but the moving frames produced a lot of zigzags. I then went back to look the dtail of my AVI file and it too has the same zigzags in motion frames.
I figure it is casued by the interlace effect. When capturing at 640 by 480, I am capturing from an interlaced source to a non-interlaced AVI. Converting to VCD at 352 by 240, it removed ever other line and produced a perfact image. But for SVCD, it retained all the interlaced effect. I have tried with many option without any success. I am giving up and going back to VCD.

[Anonymous65]

If you're making a VCD, then you should capture at 352x480. I would let Tmpgenc do the 2:1 vertical reduction during encoding to mpeg-1. It will reduce the edge noise when the encoder has twice the information to work with. If you have problems captureing at 352x480, then let Vdub do the Cubic 2:1 vertical reduction during capture. It uses math to calculate a sharper image in the vertical plane by combining both fields into one frame. If you capture at 352x240, you are truely wasting half of the video information. (one exception - the ATI All in Wonder cards use a special video capture chip that automatically combines both fields even in x240 capture mode, basically doing a 2:1 reduction without you knowing about it)

I don't think you will see any difference between a 480x480 and a 352x480 capture for making a VCD. The encoding will just be a bit slower.

[alucard2050]

so in other words. for vcd. capture at 352x480 and encode at 352x480? but what about the interlace lines since its a vcd. don't you have to remove those? and what do you mean by COMBINES the lines. that part has lost me........thanks........

[fly]

I have no problem in VCD. Any tips for SVCD for removing the interlace effects?

[fly]

HI, Alucard2050,
I just tried out the interlace with VirtuDub with great success.
Get the VirtuDub from http://virtualdub.sourceforge.net/
Get the Smart Deinterlacer from http://sauron.mordor.net/dgraft/smart.html
After installed both programs, run the VirtuDub and open your AVI files,
under Video, select filter and add Smart Deinterlace with default settings,
Set compression to your normal AVI codec. Run the VirtualDub and your interlace will be removed cleanly. Her you go with the SVCD with crisp picture and smooth motion too.

[alucard2050]

how do i set TMPGE to do a 2:1 vertical reduction? i have a clip that i captured useing 352x480 and the huffy codec. so now what? i am makeing it a vcd mpeg1 at 352x480. so would i still deinterlace or do the 2:1 reduction. now to figure out what that means......thanks.........

[fly]

Since VCD is 352 by 240, there is no interlace problem if you captured at 352 by 480. Ever other line will be removed. Just us the standard VCD NTSC template supplied by TMPGen, it will produce VCD at 352 by 240.
No need to deinterlace or any 2:1 reduction settings.

[alucard2050]

fly- i don't think you understand what i'm trying to do. my xvcd's are fantastic. if i capture as i have been at 480x480. then encode useing TMPGE at 480x480 and i de-interlace it. what am i loseing? i know every other frame but am i gaining anything back by keeping it at 480? my goal is to make svcd's. mpeg2 allows me to keep both fields which has given me a more sharper picture but this goes back to the original problem of ghost from the moving objects. something i never got with vcd's that i make now. i tried swapping the field order but that didn't work. i can't up the bitrate because the 1 of my 2 players won't play anything higher than the standard svcd. i'm just board with what i can do now and want to go farther and improve what i already can do. but, does encodeing the file at 480 which is what i captured to and deinterlacing really doing anything or is their a better way other than doing it all at 240. and i still dont get what the benifit is of capturing at 352x480 instead of 480x480.....thanks...........

[fly]

Alucard2050,
If you want to produce VCD, you should capture at 352 by 480, and then let TMPGEng do the work of using VCD tamplate. It will create a 352 by 240 Mpeg-1 file. Don't mess around with deinterlace since it is removing every other line. If you capture at 352 by 240, you will need to run VirtuDub with smart deinterlacer (see eralier note) prior to TMPGEng. If you want to create SVCD. you need to capture at 480 by 480, then run VirtuDub with smart Deinterlacer (see earlier note) then run the TMPGEng using SVCD tamplate, agian no need to deinterlace since its been done by VirtuDub. I tried the deinterlacer from TMPGEnc, I could not figure out how to make it work right. VirtuDub does a great job. Hope it helps.

[Dave B]

Let me try to clear a few things up here...

When making an NTSC VCD that has a native resolution of 352x240 you should capture at 352x480. Capturing at a horizontal resolution of 352 rather than 480 takes less time to re-encode and you do not introduce artifacts into the video through the horizontal resizing procedure.

You should always also capture video (for either NTSC VCD or NTSC SVCD) at the full vertical resolution - 480. When capturing from a broadcast source this will give you interlaced video. VCDs do not support interlaced video so you must de-interlace it to get rid of the interlacing artifacts on moving objects. Donald Graft's de-interlacer for VirtualDub is one of the best available as it keeps as much of the original detail as possible.

After de-interlacing you will still be left with a resolution of 352x480 (de-interlacing does not resize). You must then use a resize filter such as that in VirtualDub or TMPGEnc to re-encode the video to VCD standards - 352x240.

There you go.. clear as mud.

[alucard2050]

but i have done 352x240 and its not as good as a 480x480...i capture at 480x480 and encode it at 480x480...and the finished project is a non-standard vcd with the bitrate of 1600...so what is being said is by captureing at x480 and then encoding at 480 with the de-interlace on. i might as well be capturing at 240 and encodeing at 240.....either way why do my svcd's have a ghost effect when my vcd's do not?? if svcd is better than why does this happen?? thanks.......

[fly]

Did you try to use the VirtueDub with samrt deinterlace for your SVCD? Setting deinterlace in TMPGEng will not do the job.

[Fred©]

Hey alucard,

I saw you have ghosts in your movie... But have you burned a test movie? That's because I suppose that you want to see your SVCD in TV set, not in computer... well, TV sets are interlaced monitors while the computer monitor are not... so, if you see ghosts in computer, maybe you will not see them in TV sets...

Fred©

[alucard2050]

i tried to play it on a tv set and it was the same...i havn't tried vdub yet but to do that doesn't it encode the file? if so then i have to do another encode with TMPGE or will vdub do what i want it to do? thanks.......

[Fred©]

Sorry, no more ideias...

I do not play SVCD...

Fred©

[playndirty101]

hmm okay i downloaded a movie with 670x240, what should i do for best quality on VCD?

Should i use the SMart de-interlacer? Please advise.

[fly]

For alucard2050, you need to run Virtualdub with smart deinterlacer, it will creat a new AVI file. you will then run TMPGEnc to convert it to mpg-2 file for SVCD.
For playndirty101, since you downlaod at assume 670 by 240, you might need to run thru smart deinterlacer. If you downlaod at 670 by 480, then you can do w/o deinterlacer for VCD.

[playndirty101]

hey fly,

thanks for your response... if i run it thru smart deinterlacer.. does this give the movie a better quality when i encode with tmpgenc using kwag's template but changing it to 352x240, CQ: 80 and min bitrate:500

i tried 702x480 it doesnt play correctly on my dvd player, i need to burn it as a VCD only.

Your thoughts?

[Nelson37]

Alucard2050 - you may be seeing Telecining effects. This is basically intermittent interlacing, done to stretch 24fps to 30fps. Resizing to 240 will eliminate these by throwing them away, deinterlacing will exaggerate them. This is because the two different fields involved are from two different frames. In Vdub, select movement scene, step frame by frame. If you see a pattern of 3 good frames followed by 2 frames with lines around moving objects, you need to do IVTC. If you are capturing movies, this is almost certainly the case.

It is more complex to understand than to solve, and ultimately gives you great benefits - you are reducing the amount of movie you have to encode by 20%!

[jackhyde]

fly said
"Did you try to use the VirtueDub with samrt deinterlace for your SVCD? Setting deinterlace in TMPGEng will not do the job."

I tried your suggestion even though I was satisfied with my previous SVCD projects. I capture from a Matrox G200 so my input files are encoded in Matrox MJPEG. I usually use TMPEGenc with the Blend interlace filter. I do see the ghosting that is reported in this post but that is better than the comb effect without the filter.
Anyway I used Virtualdub with default settings and selected the Smart interlace filter and set the compressor to the Matrox MJPEG. The result is an AVI file that is now loaded with blocky artifacts which I didn't have in the original. What am I doing wrong? Are there any guides for Virtualdub and the Smart interlace filter available? Any help with using these programs would be appreciated.