Soccer matches - CBR vs VBR decision

[manono]

You could always do a comparison yourself. I believe an interlaced stream will require roughly a 50% greater bitrate as compared to a progressive version of the same stream for the same quality.

For DVD, anyway, I don't believe the fields are encoded separately and then woven back together. It's possible, of course, but rarely used. The Pic_Structure flag defines whether fields or frames are being encoded. The picture below shows the several ways to encode for NTSC DVD. The rarely used 2nd example shows what (I think) you're referring to. It's from here:

https://hometheaterhifi.com/volume_7_4/dvd-benchmark-part-5-progressive-10-2000.html

[jagabo]

Maybe what you are saying is that a diagonal line will have a lot more staircasing for the half-height field, and the encoder must work harder to encode that cleanly. If that is the point, I can see how that might be so.

Yes.

[Santuzzu]

Yes, that is correct. Progressive encoding is more efficient than interlaced encoding. So if you can encode part of the frame progressive you get more compression and/or lose less quality loss.

Thanks jagabo.

I would like to know what is the best software to freeze some frame for a few seconds? Is re-encoding necessary in that case? And another question, what is the best way to compare two audio files/signals (same soccer match, different footages) and find how much one of them is time-shifted comparing to another one?

[Santuzzu]

One more question: How to join two interlaced videos if one of them has a constant frame rate and another one variable?