VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2
FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 54 of 54
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    ok, bad choice of wording (my bad)

    Lets say, each cameras are connected to corresponding displays
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by edDV



    720p has great advantage for high motion sports like football, hockey and soccer. It lacks the low motion detail of 1080i for sports like golf or baseball. 1080i/29.97 can still look good on an interlace display but tends to soften during camera or object motion and can have motion artifacts on progressive displays.

    .
    Bingo, thats what I'm trying to ask lol

    Could you please tell me what causes that and why it doesn't effect video games
    Quote Quote  
  3. Originally Posted by edDV
    Originally Posted by Guiboche
    Well you said "Transfered to a PC." Why would one need to transfer to a PC then to a monitor?

    But, if anything, what you are seeing is the true sh**y nature of interlacing. It sucks. Always has and always will.....
    You are ignoring the benefit of nearly twice as as many channels in the same bandwidth.

    Are you saying you would trade half the DirecTV or cable channels for progressive?
    Oh, there's those reasons, yes. But I'm just considering the quality of what interlaced it: crap
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Note in the picture above, each field has some motion blur (e.g. the oval shaped ball) but each field is sharp. It is the deinterlacer that causes field to field "blur".

    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    guys, we are talking about displaying interlaced videos on a interlaced CRT.


    Now you've mentioned "1080i/29.97 can still look good on an interlace display but tends to soften during camera or object motion"

    What do you mean by that?
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by edDV

    There are two broad strategies

    1. combine 480i or 1080i fields into a 29.97fps progressive frame.

    2. interpolate each field into a progressive frame at 59.94fps.

    The first strategy can lose motion detail, the second strategy may increase flicker and artifacts. The usual solution is a combination of the two based on pixel motion.

    I need to pause here and be back later.
    Further to above...

    Good hardware deinterlacers will do motion analysis at pixel level on each of a series of frames and switch deinterlace strategies on a pixel or pixel block basis based on the amount of motion and surrounding video characteristics. Slowly moving areas will trigger bob and weave strategies to build up resolution. Faster moving areas will favor field to field motion detail to avoid blur. The eye is sensitive to motion accuracy but not to detail in areas that are moving.

    The more sophisticated hardware deinterlacers are found in premium progressive DVD players and upper tier HDTV sets. A quality hardware deinterlacer will improve the look of 480i, 576i and 1080i video. In contrast, cheap progressive DVD players and progressive HDTV sets will perform poorly with 480i and 576i sources. 1080i won't have as many problems since the pixels are relatively smaller.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Originally Posted by edDV
    Are you saying you would trade half the DirecTV or cable channels for progressive?
    If I could choose the channels -- YES! LOL
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    thank you guys for helping me with this inquiry.


    I think I understand it now.

    1. Interlaced does not cause motion blur
    2. Motion blur is caused by shutter speed of the camera
    3. Anything that was initially rendered using a computer or gaming device will not cause motion blur

    Am I on the right track?
    Quote Quote  
  9. Originally Posted by Dark Alpha
    thank you guys for helping me with this inquiry.


    I think I understand it now.

    1. Interlaced does not cause motion blur
    2. Motion blur is caused by shutter speed of the camera
    3. Anything that was initially rendered using a computer or gaming device will not cause motion blur

    Am I on the right track?
    Yes. Although I wouldn't say "ANYTHING rendered on a computer or gaming device". Sometimes motion blur is added for cinematic effects. A simple way to create motion blur is to render several intermediate frames and then average them together. So you might render 5 frames at slightly different time increments, average them together, then display the results. So to get 30 fps on-screen you'd have to render 150 fps.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    ya, I've seen people to do that to remove annoying judder


    Looks like that it for me. I now know all all about response time, contrast ratio, display panels, interlaced vs progressive, color depth (well, almost) and types of LCD panels.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo
    Originally Posted by Dark Alpha
    thank you guys for helping me with this inquiry.


    I think I understand it now.

    1. Interlaced does not cause motion blur
    2. Motion blur is caused by shutter speed of the camera
    3. Anything that was initially rendered using a computer or gaming device will not cause motion blur

    Am I on the right track?
    Yes. Although I wouldn't say "ANYTHING rendered on a computer or gaming device". Sometimes motion blur is added for cinematic effects. A simple way to create motion blur is to render several intermediate frames and then average them together. So you might render 5 frames at slightly different time increments, average them together, then display the results. So to get 30 fps on-screen you'd have to render 150 fps.
    True motion blur is very subtle like that baseball turning into a oval or spinning wheels blurring when viewed from the side. Most mention of progressive monitor blur in areas of the picture where moving objects blur out or break into pixels relates to inferior deinterlacing methods collectively known as blend deinterlace. Blend deinterlace is the cheapest and ugliest way to deinterlace video.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    But neither format would blur when panning the camera slowly (like in Pop ideal, news, sports etc…)

    Edit: I've just downloaded 60fps progressive video from Stage6 and it had motion blur during movement (clapping or waving hands etc..). So you guys were spot on. Interlaced does not cause motion blur.


    again, thank you guys for putting up with me lol
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    is this better?

    Motion Blur:
    Many people have accused interlaced format as the primary cause of motion blur, which simply isn’t true.
    When capturing a video in full motion detail (50-60i/p), there’ll be visible motion blur during fast movement/panning (http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/2803/videonn0.gif). This is caused by exposure over a period of time. To reduce/eliminate this effect, camera with high shutter speed is required.

    Computer generated images on the other hand are rendered in stills (like hand-drawn cartoons). They have zero exposure time (http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/7374/gamewh4.gif). This method does not cause any form of motion blur unless it was deliberately applied.


    Click here for detailed info(http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/2687/cgivsvideojpgzq0.jpg)


    So in conclusion, interlaced format does not cause any from of motion blur. It is actually depends on the camera used to capture the video.

    [b]Note:[/b] Poor de-interlacers, scalers and video enhancers can cause severe motion blur when displaying interlaced videos on a progressive screen.
    I would like thank the users over at the videohelp forums for assisting me on this subject.
    [/u]
    Quote Quote  
  14. You 60 fps progressive sample was almost certainly captured as interlaced and then blend deinterlaced. Notice how the fast motions look like double exposures.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    I though it was weird too

    Do you know of any videos captured in 60fps?
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Dark Alpha
    I though it was weird too

    Do you know of any videos captured in 60fps?
    In the USA, all ABC and FOX high def sports are acquired and broadcast in 1280x720p/59.94fps. ESPN does the same on cable but many local cable systems and sat send it as 480i or 1080i.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    Do you know where I can download small segment?
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Dark Alpha
    Do you know where I can download small segment?
    I'm away from an HD source. I could send you some Monday.

    Maybe others can grab some weekend ABC or FOX sports 720p MPeg2_TS. Look for high action examples.

    This afternoon they are doing "Indianapolis 500 time trials" in 720p.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    Found one lol
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Dark Alpha
    Originally Posted by edDV



    720p has great advantage for high motion sports like football, hockey and soccer. It lacks the low motion detail of 1080i for sports like golf or baseball. 1080i/29.97 can still look good on an interlace display but tends to soften during camera or object motion and can have motion artifacts on progressive displays.

    .
    Bingo, thats what I'm trying to ask lol

    Could you please tell me what causes that and why it doesn't effect video games
    I think I destroyed my answer to this question by accident when adding a comment so I will repeat here.
    I meant that sentence to be read.

    1080i/29.97 can still look good on an interlace display but tends to soften during camera or object motion and can have motion artifacts on progressive displays.
    Quote Quote  
  21. That looks like real motion blur.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    thats it, finally lol
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    I hope that all if it. It's getting too hard update my TV guide lol


    Feel free to check it out

    http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=380872
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!