My Premiere Pro exports give me little black borders on the top and bottom

[budwzr]

Lot of Sony Vegas users in this forum.

Although the help you're received so far has been exemplary, you're not able to absorb the help because your foundational understanding is limited.

[aedipuss]

an easy way to get your source file converted to standard 854x480p mp4 with no black bars top and bottom is with vidcoder. it handles your source file with no problem. once they are in standard mp4 you may find other programs work with them.

[CZbwoi]

Lot of Sony Vegas users in this forum.

Although the help you're received so far has been exemplary, you're not able to absorb the help because your foundational understanding is limited.

Would you say that switching to Vegas would fix the exporting problem and not give me black borders when I match source and all that?

an easy way to get your source file converted to standard 854x480p mp4

How is that standard though? If my source file is 720 how is increasing it all the way up to 854 standard and how would that not stretch it out or alter it? You're changing the dimensions unequally. And does vidcoder compress it or degrade it any way, when I'm exporting in Premiere you guys told me it's leaving a chroma effect and I don't know what I'm doing to cause that.

[budwzr]

Yes. Of course Vegas can conform and render anything. So long as it can read the file.

[CZbwoi]

People say the same thing about Premiere, yet we see how it confuses this video's aspect ratio with the standard.

The short explanation is there are slightly different aspect ratio interpretations. PP uses ITU aspect ratio interpretation

It assumes that NTSC 720x480 16:9 uses a pixel aspect ratio of ~1.2121 (or 40:33) which is slightly wider instead of non ITU aspect ratio interpretation which uses ~1.1852 (or 32:27)

Your original is 16:9 (1.78:1). Your export has a slightly different aspect ratio of 109:60 (1.82:1).

The export is incorrectly tagged as 109:60 instead of 16:9, which is causing the display discrepancy.

So you can confirm that Vegas won't have this problem when exporting, you've exported my MPG file to MP4 in it? And I guess that it wouldn't have this chroma effect too.

[poisondeathray]

Vegas uses ITU AR, just like premiere. You will get black bars unless you do workarounds, such as resize with square pixels, or frameserve out similar to PP. You will find most professional NLE's use ITU interpretation because that is the standard.

smrpix meant 854 width, 480 height. That was likely a typo. You're resizing to 16:9 with square pixels. This is what your media player does on playback anyways. If you view your original mpg in a software player, it will be resized to 853 or 854 (depending on rounding) x 480 .

If you leave it interlaced, it's going to be unexpected and weird. 854x480 interlaced TFF is a non standard format. Many players, applications, devices won't know what to do with it. But you can always manually activate a deinterlacer (or double rate deinterlacer) during playback

Vidcoder re-encodes, you will lose quality and it's slower. The mp4box workaround doesn't re-encode, same quality, faster

[budwzr]

See, Vegas can do it.

[CZbwoi]

smrpix meant 854 width, 480 height. That was likely a typo. You're resizing to 16:9 with square pixels. This is what your media player does on playback anyways. If you view your original mpg in a software player, it will be resized to 853 or 854 (depending on rounding) x 480 .

But no quality will be lost right? It's still the same "size" as before just portrayed in a different matter, like the metric system vs imperial, Fahrenheit vs Celsius? Like you can get the same thing in both it's just worded differently.

If you leave it interlaced, it's going to be unexpected and weird. 854x480 interlaced TFF is a non standard format. Many players, applications, devices won't know what to do with it. But you can always manually activate a deinterlacer (or double rate deinterlacer) during playback

So you recommend I deinterlace it too, how do I deinterlace it during export in Premiere Pro?

Also some other quick Q's: Do I check Render at Maximum Depth in the video tab? The target bitrate is defaulted at 6 and the max at 8, should I keep it as is (or drop down a notch or up) and select 2 pass VBR over 1 pass and CBR? Use Maximum Render Quality at the bottom...check? And how about Use Frame Blending?


@budwzr...very funny. You almost had me. I was confused for a second as to how you got the same exact look as my window but the video was fixed, but it was still Premiere, and my files were in there no one else has access too, and...yeah. But it'd be nice to know if Vegas really did just export it fine on its own somehow lol.

[poisondeathray]

smrpix meant 854 width, 480 height. That was likely a typo. You're resizing to 16:9 with square pixels. This is what your media player does on playback anyways. If you view your original mpg in a software player, it will be resized to 853 or 854 (depending on rounding) x 480 .

But no quality will be lost right? It's still the same "size" as before just portrayed in a different matter, like the metric system vs imperial, Fahrenheit vs Celsius? Like you can get the same thing in both it's just worded differently.

If you meant PP/AME, yes quality is lost, because you're re-encoding with a lossy format. You're recompressing it, throwing away bits of information

If you meant playing back the mpg in a media player, it's just "stretching" the image to 16:9 . 720x480 is 1.5 AR because 720/480 = 1.5. You're starting with a "non square pixel" format. Aspect ratio flags in either the stream or container tell the media player to stretch the image to 16:9.

So you recommend I deinterlace it too, how do I deinterlace it during export in Premiere Pro?

No, I recommended you append the originals. You double rate deinterlace on the fly. However, if you're going to do all the other things, I already suggested a different workflow with avisynth, QTGMC, x264

Also some other quick Q's: Do I check Render at Maximum Depth in the video tab? The target bitrate is defaulted at 6 and the max at 8, should I keep it as is (or drop down a notch or up) and select 2 pass VBR over 1 pass and CBR? Use Maximum Render Quality at the bottom...check? And how about Use Frame Blending?

Max depth only deals with higher bitdepth formats. You're only using 8 bit video, exporting 8bit video, so it's not necessary. For target bitrate, the higher the value, the less quality loss. Higher bitrates also mean larger filesizes because filesize = bitrate * running time. Eventually there will be diminish returns, but it's something only you can decide. 2pass VBR is more efficient than CBR, in general. You can think of it as distributing peaks and valleys in a smarter way. CBR would only be used for specific purposes that require it (eg. some broadcast or streaming scnearios may require it). Frame blending only takes effect when there is a change in frame rate somewhere (source, sequence, or export settings). In that case added frames are blended between adjacent ones. This doesn't affect you here because source , sequence, export are all the same frame rate. However, if you double rate deinterlaced, it would blend deinterlace instead of spatial interpolation - so it also affects the deinterlacing behaviour . Also, have a look at the PP help file - most of your questions should be answered there. If you're not satisfied with the answer, then ask

[CZbwoi]

However, if you're going to do all the other things, I already suggested a different workflow with avisynth, QTGMC, x264

I knew about doing that with one file, a captured AVI file, but what I'm hearing here is new. So I can insert all of these MPG files into Avisynth (through AvsP as well as that would be simpler for me) and combine them, take certain things out like parts of a clip, add the QTGMC script, all at the same time? Can you explain how to do this step by step if this is what you meant? That sounds too good to be true. (and I'd also have to somehow rip all the entire clips' length of audio to mux it into an MP4 if I were to use x264, can I rip out the combined audio in Avisynth?)

[poisondeathray]

However, if you're going to do all the other things, I already suggested a different workflow with avisynth, QTGMC, x264

I knew about doing that with one file, a captured AVI file, but what I'm hearing here is new. So I can insert all of these MPG files into Avisynth (through AvsP as well as that would be simpler for me) and combine them, take certain things out like parts of a clip, add the QTGMC script, all at the same time? Can you explain how to do this step by step if this is what you meant? That sounds too good to be true. (and I'd also have to somehow rip all the entire clips' length of audio to mux it into an MP4 if I were to use x264, can I rip out the combined audio in Avisynth?)

Yes you can, but as good as avisynth is at certain things, the actually process of editing is more tedious and not as slick or poilshed as in a NLE. If you're doing just simple edits on a few clips, you can probably do it without getting frustrated or pulling your hair out. But if it's a large project, I personally wouldn't want to do the editing part in avisynth

For MPG2 sources in avisynth, the most consistent way to load (as a source filters) is still DGIndex (DGMPGDec), or the Nvidia variant DGDecNV (but the latter isn't free). But this means indexing each MPG, creating a script, loading the audio using audiodub() too add both audio & video. You have to load the audio because if you are making edits,cuts, you need to cut the audio as well otherwise you will become out of sync. There are batch scripting tools , such as batch avs tools and dgindex batcher, but it's still more hoops to jump though than something like a NLE. But NLE's have their own quirks and hoops to jump through if you want it done properly . Pros/Cons to whatever way you choose.

No question, the deinterlacing quality , will be better when performed with that avisynth workflow than a NLE. No question, the AVC encoding quality is better than what you will find bundled a NLE. These are not someones opinion , or even up for discussion - the differences are that clear. Have a look at some posted comparisons or do some mini tests yourself to see if it's worth it for your purposes

If the same you uploaded was representative of the other footage, some other things you might want to address are the levels (you have overbrights > Y=235) , maybe some stabilization. The other things you might want to do are more subjective, but for sure you should fix the levels

[aedipuss]

did you ever mention what the final output you want is? your source is standard def interlaced mpeg-2 720x480 recorded as widescreen. that means it uses non-square pixels. in modern square pixel formats like mp4 it needs to be re-sized to 854x480 and de-interlaced. it's what most modern video players prefer. unless you are planning to make dvds out of the videos, i'd convert them all to mp4. it would make sharing them on any device much easier.

vidcoder conversion to 480p mp4

[poisondeathray]

@aedipuss - in vidcoder, I would have double rate deinterlaced to 59.94p, otherwise you throw out half the information and lose the motion smoothness

[CZbwoi]

Yes you can, but as good as avisynth is at certain things, the actually process of editing is more tedious and not as slick or poilshed as in a NLE. If you're doing just simple edits on a few clips, you can probably do it without getting frustrated or pulling your hair out. But if it's a large project, I personally wouldn't want to do the editing part in avisynth

All I was planning to do editing wise for these set of videos was remove a few seconds off of a few videos, where the camera started off facedown and muffled for a while and stuff like that, nothing extensive.

But this means indexing each MPG, creating a script, loading the audio using audiodub() too add both audio & video.

For every single video and then load up every videos components? Oy...that sounds more complicated than I had thought, if for any given "day" video I would have 10-15 separate ones.

No question, the deinterlacing quality , will be better when performed with that avisynth workflow than a NLE.

Is VidCoder considered a NLE or is it's deinterlacing quality good as well?

If the same you uploaded was representative of the other footage, some other things you might want to address are the levels (you have overbrights > Y=235) , maybe some stabilization. The other things you might want to do are more subjective, but for sure you should fix the levels

Is there a specific code you would point to to fix that?

did you ever mention what the final output you want is? your source is standard def interlaced mpeg-2 720x480 recorded as widescreen. that means it uses non-square pixels. in modern square pixel formats like mp4 it needs to be re-sized to 854x480 and de-interlaced. it's what most modern video players prefer. unless you are planning to make dvds out of the videos, i'd convert them all to mp4. it would make sharing them on any device much easier.

All that I wanted was for it to play like the original in the same (or better) quality and fill up the screen like it did, so if how it originally is with non-square pixels isn't the standard, then I guess it needs to be changed to what you guys say: 854x480 in modern square pixel format. MP4 would be preferred as long as nothing is lost.

And I can't tell if that video you uploaded is worse quality than the original...I think it's a little worse switching back and forth between them?


Okay guys, so I've had VidCoder installed in my computer for a while, it's version 1.5.34.0 and this should be good to try out what you're saying. I dragged all the files into the bottom half of the screen. What do I do for the best quality and result in MP4 like you said but also with double rate deinterlace like what poisondeathray suggested? The preset is currently set to Normal (Modified).

There's a Picture, Video Filters, Video and Audio tab and I'm assuming all will have to be dabbled in.

Bonus question: This file that is exported out of here, or even the one I got in Premiere (which I made with 854x480 but it's not deinterlaced because it's not possible there), can I insert that into Avisynth and do some further altering to it like the overbright levels/stabilization you suggested, or would that be a no-no since I'd be re-encoding it or compressing it more than once? Bad idea?

[poisondeathray]

All I was planning to do editing wise for these set of videos was remove a few seconds off of a few videos, where the camera started off facedown and muffled for a while and stuff like that, nothing extensive.

That's definitely "doable" and easily done in avisynth

But this means indexing each MPG, creating a script, loading the audio using audiodub() too add both audio & video.

For every single video and then load up every videos components? Oy...that sounds more complicated than I had thought, if for any given "day" video I would have 10-15 separate ones.

Yes, that's what it means. Each video has to be loaded in order for it to be appended or manipulated in anyway... There are some batch tools as mentioned earlier, but it's still "jumping through hoops" to an extent

Is VidCoder considered a NLE or is it's deinterlacing quality good as well?

Not an NLE.

Vidcoder just an alternative GUI for handbrake, and you've used handbrake before. It's basically a GUI for x264 and can do few manipulations like cropping, deinterlacing, resizing. Deinterlacing isn't as good as QTGMC

If the same you uploaded was representative of the other footage, some other things you might want to address are the levels (you have overbrights > Y=235) , maybe some stabilization. The other things you might want to do are more subjective, but for sure you should fix the levels

Is there a specific code you would point to to fix that?

Yes, but you would ideally adjust it over time, because it's not overexposed all the time, only in certain segments. Often with consumer handheld footage, there is auto exposure going on. The "brightness" changes through the clip . It's more difficult to adjust in something like avisynth. In NLE's you typically keyframe the changes (the settings change over time). But the point is you have usable overbrights , most consumer cameras do. (there is usable data in that range, that won't be "seen" if you leave it as is)

All that I wanted was for it to play like the original in the same (or better) quality and fill up the screen like it did, so if how it originally is with non-square pixels isn't the standard, then I guess it needs to be changed to what you guys say: 854x480 in modern square pixel format. MP4 would be preferred as long as nothing is lost.

Something is always lost when you re-encode with a lossy format. If you're familiar with audio, an analogy would be an mp3 version of a CD . MP3 is a lossy format - so depending on the bitrate it might be nearly indistinguishable, but also can be very bad. But flac audio is lossless, the decoded data is bit for bit identical as the original

You can make it subjectively better by stabilizing, denoising, adjusting levels, color correcting, etc... but those are subjective calls

Bonus question: This file that is exported out of here, or even the one I got in Premiere (which I made with 854x480 but it's not deinterlaced because it's not possible there), can I insert that into Avisynth and do some further altering to it like the overbright levels/stabilization you suggested, or would that be a no-no since I'd be re-encoding it or compressing it more than once? Bad idea?

Huh? what isn't possible there? It's possible to deinterlace in PP, it's just that the quality isn't as good as doing it with QTGMC.

Bad idea to insert that into avisynth, because you're lossy compressing it more than once. Not only that it's a waste of time - if you were going to use avisynth, you might as use avisynth to do the other manipulations such as resizing, deinterlacing. Earlier do you recall I mentioned frameserving or a lossless (not lossy) intermediate? Those are ways you can "connect" a NLE such as vegas or PP to do some avisynth processing

[aedipuss]

if you like the way the video turned out that i posted you don't need to change much in vidcoder. these pictures show the settings used.

[budwzr]

Here's the default settings for Vegas. All I did was match the project to the media. Same as you do in PP. No cropping, stretching, or zooming.



No tricks, no bull.

[poisondeathray]

@budwzr - yes it looks fine on the timeline, just like PP.

But try exporting 720x480 16:9 AVC from vegas ie. non square pixel, same as his original source.

Vegas uses ITU AR interpretation, same as PP. Look at your project properties and export settings. NTSC DV 16:9 PAR is read as 1.2121, same as PP, which is the ITU 40:33, not the 32:27 that he wants

40/33 =~ 1.2121
32/27 =~ 1.1852

[budwzr]

@PDR - HaHa, yeah, that thing renders out with bars all around. Even fooled Vegas. Maybe the metadata is bad?

[poisondeathray]

There is nothing wrong with the source file or metadata. It's just the way professional NLE's interpret NTSC AR. They play by a different set of rules because of NTSC and PAL broadcast heritage, that's all. Essentially they base their AR calculations on the inner 704 width of the 720 image (it's technically 702 width, but rounded to 704). There are some workarounds you need to do to if you want to play by different rules, that's all. I don't want to get into a long discussion on AR, because there are a few threads literally hundreds of pages long debating what is what or what it's supposed to be, or what is "correct" , or what should be correct . The BBC is the biggest reason why NLE's do it this way. Blame them. It would be "nice" if there was a switch to toggle or if you had more AR interpretation options in the NLE's but that way, the ITU way, is FINAL according to the powers that be.

A slightly longer explanation of why this AR interpretation is chosen can be found here
http://www.lurkertech.com/lg/video-systems/#sqnonsq
http://www.provideocoalition.com/par-for-the-course/

[CZbwoi]

Vidcoder just an alternative GUI for handbrake, and you've used handbrake before. It's basically a GUI for x264 and can do few manipulations like cropping, deinterlacing, resizing. Deinterlacing isn't as good as QTGMC

Besides jumping through all those hoops to use QTGMC on a batch of MPG files at once in Avisynth, what would you rank as the best out of the rest or in order? The deinterlacing quality and final export. If somehow finding out how to use Avisynth/QTGMC with a load of files at the same time is #1, what would #2 be? Premiere Pro's (I'm still seeing that Chroma effect appear on the car freshner btw) deinterlacing, VidCoder's deinterlacing, Vegas'? And if you may, how would you alter the settings for VidCoder aedipuss provided when you said to double rate deinterlace, how do I make that happen? And would you keep the other options in Video Filters like how they have it?

Yes, but you would ideally adjust it over time, because it's not overexposed all the time, only in certain segments. Often with consumer handheld footage, there is auto exposure going on. The "brightness" changes through the clip . It's more difficult to adjust in something like avisynth. In NLE's you typically keyframe the changes (the settings change over time). But the point is you have usable overbrights , most consumer cameras do. (there is usable data in that range, that won't be "seen" if you leave it as is)

So then that settles that I'd have to do all this in PP or Vegas for this set of videos and not Avisynth if it's more difficult to adjust without the use of keyframes and whatnot, right? Lol, I think that would be too difficult for me to do in AvsP as a beginner.

Something is always lost when you re-encode with a lossy format. If you're familiar with audio, an analogy would be an mp3 version of a CD . MP3 is a lossy format - so depending on the bitrate it might be nearly indistinguishable, but also can be very bad. But flac audio is lossless, the decoded data is bit for bit identical as the original

That's a good analogy.

Huh? what isn't possible there? It's possible to deinterlace in PP, it's just that the quality isn't as good as doing it with QTGMC.

Yeah, I YouTubed a tutorial before I read this post, what I originally meant was it not having an option to deinterlace on the export page. In PP you have to select every single video individually and right click > Field Options > Always Deinterlace, which is sort of annoying that you have to do each video in your timeline one by one.

Earlier do you recall I mentioned frameserving or a lossless (not lossy) intermediate? Those are ways you can "connect" a NLE such as vegas or PP to do some avisynth processing

Yes, but I know nothing of it unfortunately. I'm sort of familiar with frameserving via Vdub because in that one YouTube video the guy frameserved into AvsP (which you called pointless or complex), but that's all I know.

if you like the way the video turned out that i posted you don't need to change much in vidcoder. these pictures show the settings used.

Thanks for the pictures, also going to export it your way now and test it out. Just a little side question, we're all talking about deinterlacing here to fix the footage and make it more smooth, why is your deinterlace option turned off? Why'd you choose to turn those other 2 things to default while not deinterlacing?


And I just want to say thanks to all you guys for helping so far with everything, especially somebody that has little to no idea what they're doing in this world, you're awesome. I knew a thing or two about editing movies and videos, but this is some extensive stuff I thought I'd never delve into, and it's all thanks to old tapes and camcorder footage I'm trying to convert and preserve for my family lol.

[budwzr]

I tried again, and this time it came out fine. I did a pre-render first, then rendered to MP4 this time. Last time I put it in an MXF.

UPDATE: I made a mistake and rendered it out to 720p, but it's perfect. So the video is 720 YaThink?

http://files.videohelp.com/u/135518/Untitled.mp4

To The OP: Can you try that in PP? This might be a workaround. If this works, you might be able to render a second time to a proper 480 AR.

Hehehe, looks like I slipped into this thread on a lark, and ended up solving the puzzle. Unless somebody else beat me already. I didn't bother to read the whole thread.

[poisondeathray]

Besides jumping through all those hoops to use QTGMC on a batch of MPG files at once in Avisynth, what would you rank as the best out of the rest or in order? The deinterlacing quality and final export. If somehow finding out how to use Avisynth/QTGMC with a load of files at the same time is #1, what would #2 be? Premiere Pro's (I'm still seeing that Chroma effect appear on the car freshner btw) deinterlacing, VidCoder's deinterlacing, Vegas'? And if you may, how would you alter the settings for VidCoder aedipuss provided when you said to double rate deinterlace, how do I make that happen? And would you keep the other options in Video Filters like how they have it?

Premiere appears not to be handling the chroma properly, I don't know why. There should be a workaround, or a way to handle it properly - but I don't have time right now to look

I don't have handbrake or vidcoder currently installed on any of my computers, but IIRC, you just set the frame rate to double with the deinterlacer turned on . Double rate deinterlacing will make a large difference in the "smoothness" of the video - it will look less "choppy"

Personally, I would probably stabilize the video a bit - that' s something most people can can appreciate. The motion smoothness (either keeping it interlaced, and double rate deinterlacing either on the fly during playback, or before encoding) is also something all viewers can appreciate

So then that settles that I'd have to do all this in PP or Vegas for this set of videos and not Avisynth if it's more difficult to adjust without the use of keyframes and whatnot, right? Lol, I think that would be too difficult for me to do in AvsP as a beginner.

Not necessarily - those manipulations take a bit of time and fiddling even in a NLE. You do have the option to just leave it, or only do some minor tweaks , or anything in between. Maybe you only want to adjust some footage that has big changes. It depends on how much effort you want to put into it and what your expectations are.

You might want to do some mini tests with some different methods, sort of test the waters to see what you're getting into before you commit

Huh? what isn't possible there? It's possible to deinterlace in PP, it's just that the quality isn't as good as doing it with QTGMC.

Yeah, I YouTubed a tutorial before I read this post, what I originally meant was it not having an option to deinterlace on the export page. In PP you have to select every single video individually and right click > Field Options > Always Deinterlace, which is sort of annoying that you have to do each video in your timeline one by one.

If you have the file and sequence interpreted as interlaced (ie as you do now), all you do is set "progressive" instead of field or TFF in the export options. Then it will deinterlace the export. If you have frame blending on it will blend deinterlace, if you have frame blending off it will interpolate. If you set framerate to 59.94p it will be double, 29.97 will be single rate.

[poisondeathray]

I tried again, and this time it came out fine. I did a pre-render first, then rendered to MP4 this time. Last time I put it in an MXF.

UPDATE: I made a mistake and rendered it out to 720p, but it's perfect. So the video is 720 YaThink?

http://files.videohelp.com/u/135518/Untitled.mp4

To The OP: Can you try that in PP? This might be a workaround.

This would be resizing using "square pixels", essentially the same workaround smrpix suggested in PP . You're upscaling to 1280x720, instead of 854x480. But this is single rate deinterlaced too (29.97), thus choppier than the original. You should select 59.94p if you were chosing that route. Also it's "blend" deinterlaced, so much blurrier. "interpolate" is usually preferred for vegas for deinterlacing if you had to deinterlace with vegas

But 720x480 16:9 is something he originally wanted - it's not possible with a direct export in most NLE's using non-ITU ratios

[budwzr]

OK, then I cede the throne to smrpix. I like that plan. Makes the coloring and whatnot more accurate, if edited.

[budwzr]

... But this is single rate deinterlaced too (29.97), thus choppier than the original. You should select 59.94p if you were chosing that route. Also it's "blend" deinterlaced, so much blurrier. "interpolate" is usually preferred for vegas for deinterlacing if you had to deinterlace with vegas...

Yeah, I just did a quick dirty render. I do use interpolate normally, but didn't bother with it.

[aedipuss]

there is no reason to double frame rate deinterlace with vidcoder if you leave decomb on. it uses a smart deinterlacer that only removes combing artifacts (yadif in slower mode). did you even look at the sample?

[poisondeathray]

there is no reason to double frame rate deinterlace with vidcoder if you leave decomb on. it uses a smart deinterlacer that only removes combing artifacts (yadif in slower mode). did you even look at the sample?

Not sure if this was directed at me, but I looked at it - that's how I know and made the suggestion.

Single rate deinterlacing throws away 1/2 the frames, so motion won't be - can't be - as smooth. Surely you've watched sports on TV, maybe football, hockey etc... That "live" look and smooth motion is from the higher framerate. Even a "bad" deinterlacer is perferable to throwing away 1/2 the frames.

The deinterlacing quality isn't that great in handbrake/vidcoder - it's riddled with aliasing artifacts. Buzzing lines, marching ants. Some people are "less tuned" to seeing them, but they are signature yadif artifacts anytime you use handbrake/vidcoder to deinterlace .

I can post some videos, some comparisons and screenshots if you want

Double rate deinterlacing (or leaving it interlaced if you playback on a proper setup), and stabilization, are the biggest "bang for buck" in terms of "pleasant viewing experience" for typical viewers for handheld footage like this. Those are differences your average viewer, even "grandma", can appreciate

[CZbwoi]

So I got back home and checked on VidCoder and it finished with the files except...nothing was joined..? I thought this would join my files in addition to converting it, because that was sort of y'know...the idea behind what I wanted lol. Now instead I have 12 files turned to MP4 (regardless there's black borders on the side now instead, as if it were a little bigger than 4:3).

And to get back to what's been my most perfect file so far thanks to Premiere, the size being right, screen finally filling up everything, deinterlaced each video in the timeline...and look at how bad this chroma effect is. I barely even understand what chroma is when you talk about it but look at all that leaked red, the after-image left by it. Back to our old friend, the car freshener.



edit: I also just exported the file in Premiere with how you suggested:

If you have the file and sequence interpreted as interlaced (ie as you do now), all you do is set "progressive" instead of field or TFF in the export options. Then it will deinterlace the export. If you have frame blending on it will blend deinterlace, if you have frame blending off it will interpolate. If you set framerate to 59.94p it will be double, 29.97 will be single rate.

Except "Progressive" was selected instead of Upper First and Lower First, those 3 were in the option labeled "Field Order", Field or TFF weren't there. Framerate was set to 59.94. I didn't select Frame Blending as idk what that will do, but I'll do a separate export again with that one checked.

My thoughts: some part of it look comically sped up because of the framerate, everything is all smooth and beautiful now with no jagged lines but it looks like people are hyper-actively Sonic the Hedgehog in some moments. I don't know if that's just my brain overreacting or something because I'm used to the blurry low frame one, but is this normal? It looks great but at the same time it moves around so much (I'm guessing this is because he's moving the camcorder around so much?)

I tried adding the Warp Stabilizer effect to try to fix the stabilization, added it to the first clip and waited for the preview to process and while at first I liked what I saw, when I went back to see what it did I got rid of it. It zoomed in into the video significantly and cut stuff off just to stabilize it like parts of the road, sometimes parts of their heads too. I liked that it was more smooth and less jumpy but not at the expense of cutting off footage and zooming into an already low quality piece of film.

[budwzr]

...I tried adding the Warp Stabilizer effect to try to fix the stabilization, added it to the first clip and waited for the preview to process and while at first I liked what I saw, when I went back to see what it did I got rid of it. It zoomed in into the video...

That's called "Jello Effect". If the footage is valuable, try to stabilize it by hand first to smooth out the extreme shakes. I don't speak the PP terminology, but in Vegas I pre-stabilize using the Pan/Crop tool, which can be keyframed. Surely PP has this tool, but under a different name.

A better way is to use "Motion Tracking" to stabilize. But I think you need AE to do that.

But the good news is that after you deal with trying to stabilize via software, you will be motivated to keep a steady hand on the camera.