Interlace on 640 x 352?

[aamir12345678]

I am encoding a non-standard SVCD with a resolution of 640x352 and a framerate of 23.976 fps. Should I encode with 3:2 Pulldown Encode Mode, which would make it 29.97 fps & interlaced on playback (if I'm not mistaken), or should I encode Non-Interlace mode? My DVD Player can play it fine. My main question is whether a vertical resolution of 352 should be interlaced or non-interlaced. I know 352 x 240 should not be and that 720 x 480 should be, but what about a weird one like 640 x 352?

[lordsmurf]

I am encoding a non-standard SVCD with a resolution of 640x352 and a framerate of 23.976 fps. Should I encode with 3:2 Pulldown Encode Mode, which would make it 29.97 fps & interlaced on playback (if I'm not mistaken), or should I encode Non-Interlace mode? My DVD Player can play it fine. My main question is whether a vertical resolution of 352 should be interlaced or non-interlaced. I know 352 x 240 should not be and that 720 x 480 should be, but what about a weird one like 640 x 352?

http://www.digitalfaq.com/capture/interlace.htm

[aamir12345678]

So, if vertical resolution is 280 or above, go with interlacing every single time, right?

[junkmalle]

Are you saying that you have a file that is 640x352 23.976 fps and you want to make an SVCD out of it? Or are you actually trying to create an SVCD with video of those specs (rather than the usual 480x480 29.97 fps) on it?

[aamir12345678]

First off, I am taking a video that is 640x352 and making it into an (X)SVCD that is 480x352.

Secondly, I have been using a 3:2 Pulldown Encode Mode, but it seems to have a sort of blurry effect. Does this mean I should do non-interlace?

[lenti_75]

if the file is interlaced...keep it that way.

the resolution has nothing to do with this, don't matter.

[aamir12345678]

the file is a 640x352 23.976 fps non-interlaced xvid

I do a 3:2 pulldown tag because it is to be played on an ntsc tv

but my encoding resolution is non-standard (480x352) instead of standard (480x480)

should I still include the tag or shoud I make it non-interlaced?

as I said earlier, i included the tag and it seemed a bit blurry

should I do non-interlace encode mode then?

[junkmalle]

A normal NTSC TV can only display a 525 line (of which only 480 contain picture information), interlaced, 60 field per second signal. When you play your file on a TV it will be interlaced one way or another. Either the DVD player will do it via 3:2 pulldown while playing, or you can do it in software while encoding. The picture quality should be the same either way. If your SVCD player supports 3:2 pulldown of (X)SVCD you might as well leave the file progressive and let the player do it. The other reasons to leave it progressive is to make it easier to extract the progressive file from the CD if you ever need to, and if you ever use a progressive display device it will have an easier job playing the SVCD (it won't have to inverse telecine).

What I don't understand is why you are creating a 480x352 MPG file to burn to CD. Wny not just create a 480x480 file with black bars (assuming a wide screen picture) at the top and bottom? The black bars will compress to virtually nothing so it won't cost you any picture quality. 480x352 will only introduce compatability issues with players. In fact, even though your player appears to be playing your (X)SVCD, it may be doing some odd scaling which is resulting in the blurry picture.

If your video is full screen 4:3 (doesn't seem likey because of the dimensions of your source), software will probably do a better job of stretching the video than your DVD player.

In any case, why don't you just do the experiments yourself? I don't mean to sound sarcastic or condescending. I mean that as a friendly suggestion. In the three weeks you've been waiting for an answer you could have found out for yourself!

[aamir12345678]

sory sorry sorry

i had a different xvid this time and I didnt even notice
it was actually 480x264

that's why when I encoded with a 3:2 pulldown tag it had problems; further, i degraded the quality by encoding up to 480x352

thanks a lot smurf, your original advice was correct : >=280 encode interlace or with a 3:2 pulldown tag

sorry for the confusion

also, junkmalle, thanks for the suggestion, but I think that my encoding resolution is better for me because i dont plan on viewing this anywhere else but home. further, 480x480 would be encoding up & would take longer than encoding 480x264 480x352 480x303, or whatever.

i have a cyberhome 402. it pretty much plays all kinds of vcd's & svcd's

thanks again

[junkmalle]

I think that my encoding resolution is better for me because i dont plan on viewing this anywhere else but home. further, 480x480 would be encoding up & would take longer than encoding 480x264 480x352 480x303, or whatever.

i have a cyberhome 402. it pretty much plays all kinds of vcd's & svcd's

Yes, 480x480 would take longer to encode.

It sounds to me like you are not really creating VCDs and SVCD's. Are you just burning MPG files to ISO format disks? Most players that support that will take just about any frame size.

In any case, be sure your next player supports them too!