Conversion 4:3 to 16:9

[lollo]

Butchering video in this case (a crime), deeply butchering video in the other case (a worse crime). Leave the side black bars as they are, we do not have to fill any space. If there are top and bottom black bars, crop maintaining the original correct proportions. Any other operation is a non sense.

[Sharc]

As someone who contributed to the initial discussion some years ago, allow me to add my two cents.

Cholla, that sample which you are 'happy' with is terrible. As others have mentioned, the aspect ratio is well off so everything is wider/fatter than it should be.


I took a slightly different approach - if I echo other contributers then I apologise. But if you start with a 4:3 720*480 and wish to avoid ANY side-bars you must crop a total of 120 pixels from top and bottom and then resize that back to 720*480 with a change in AR to 16:9. Yes. You lose a little information top and bottom but surely that is better than your own 'mess'.

Similar has been advised to him/her for various final square pixels resolutions (like 1920x1080 which he/she wanted along the discussion). But @cholla repeatedly said that he/she likes it horizontally stretched because in his/her movie theatres the films are stretched as well.... believe it or not. To each his/her own.

[DB83]

^^ But he then says he wants a dvd and not a BD. Some are not easily pleased or simply confused.

Now if an earlier remark was directed to me re 'butchering' pls educate me so (addr to Lollo). One can not have it both ways. Sure you can crop just the letter-boxing but if you do not compensate the horizontal with borders you will end up with a stretched video. And cholla does not want borders (if I read him right)


And cholla's earlier comment that you can not take a 4:3 dvd to a 16:9 dvd without stretching is simply wrong.


Well I have said my piece. If cholla wants to butcher a perfectly fine dvd then so be it.

[jagabo]

Just a side note: most programs can only add 3:2 pulldown flags to convert 23.976p to 29.97i. But DgPulldown can add flags to change any progressive frame rate from 19.98p to 29.97p to 29.97i. For example, it can add 3:3 pulldown flags to 19.98, or 3:2:3:2:2 (except every 1000th frame, which gets one less pulldown to make up for the difference between 30i and 29.97i) to convert 25p to 29.97i.

[lollo]

@DB83: I consider cutting top and botton portions of the original source a crime. What OP wants is non sense.

[Sharc]

And cholla's earlier comment that you can not take a 4:3 dvd to a 16:9 dvd without stretching is simply wrong.

My impression is that he may be confusing 'stretching' with 'zooming/cropping' (?)

[cholla]

File in post #113 HORSE(02)cut.vob: Apparently AVStoDVD did not apply pulldown flags for telecining but just converted 23.976p to 29.97p by simply repeating every 4th frame like abcddefghh...... Not the smartest conversion method.
I haven't been using AVStoDVD since long, but doesn't AVStoDVD have a decent 2-3 pulldown option? Its HCenc encoder provides for this AFAIK....
(apart from the stretching,but @cholla prefers it this way).

Edit: I gave AVStoDVD a quick shot using the original HORSE(01).vob as input. It produced a correctly soft-telecined output here, means it preserved the pulldown flags.
Tried the file of post#106 HORSE(06)cut.mp4 as well. Output produced by AVStoDVD is correctly soft-telecined here.
So maybe it's just an issue with the file HORSE(02)cut.vob in post#113 which has lost the pulldown principle for some reason, or a wrong configuration/setting option (?) in AVStoDVD when this file was produced.

I changed my AVStoDVD settings from advice in this topic:
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/353284-AVStoDVD-beginners-guide-Any-video-to-DVD-V...e5#post2458043

I usually use the Default setting which you probably did.
It is A2DSource.
Is this correct?

[QUOTE=Sharc;2742547]

But @cholla repeatedly said that he/she likes it horizontally stretched because in his/her movie theatres the films are stretched as well.... believe it or not. To each his/her own.

That is not exactly a quote. These are:

If I go to a movie theater especially a large screen one the images are a lot wider.I look at it like this: even if at a movie theater the people are in the correct proportion.
They are still a lot fatter than on my TV.

Meaning at the theater the actor would not be 4 3/8 inch wide like on my computer monitor in VLC.
But much wider.

[cholla]

How did you create this one? Frame repeats producing judder, .... Did you deinterlace instead of IVTC?
Most important however that you are happy with your production and it works for you.

This was my procedure on this video:
I ripped it from a DVD with CloneDVD2.
I then joined the .VOBs with joinvobfilestool
I converted this with FFMPEG to .MP4 .
Then back to DVD with AVStoDVD.
Then burned to a test DVD +RW with ImgBurn.

FFMpeg I used dejudder & the fallback to yadif=deint=interlaced

I did not use IVTC .

[cholla]

This movie was originally film which should have been 24fps.
Then remastered digitally to 29.97 by the studio.
To do this the studio had to add frames.
That is what was pressed into the commercial DVD disk.

If I understand this what IVTC attempts to do is remove the extra frams & convert the video back to 24fps.
Even if this is done 24 does not multipy evenly into 60Hz.
To actually eliminate this a 120Hz TV or monitor is required.

If a video is 30(29.27)fps it will have the added frames(duplicates) but will divide evenly into 60Hz.
If a video is 24(29.07)fps it won't have the added frames but will not divide evenly into 60Hz.
Both cause motion problems but the 30fps video should not have judder.
The duplicate frames may be seen by some people when watching.

Explainition of judder from a website:
This should apply to monitors also.

TVs commonly have one of two refresh rates: 60Hz and 120Hz. 30 and 60 fps videos divide into those refresh rates evenly, making it easy for the TV panel to get the video to meet the panel refresh rate; this is what motion interpolation is for. For example, a 120Hz TV would just multiple each frame four times from a 30 fps video.

Likewise, most 120Hz panels can display 24p video without issue because 24 goes into 120 five times. However, judder is most noticeable on 60Hz TVs because 60 isn't a multiple of 24. Even if the TV doubles each frame, there are only 48 frames per second, and it's still missing 12 to reach the 60 fps needed to match the 60Hz refresh rate. So what TVs do is called the 3:2 pulldown (also called telecine): the odd-numbered frames repeat twice, and the even-numbered frames repeat three times to get 60 frames. However, this means that every second frame is held on longer than the next frame as it stays on the screen for 50 milliseconds compared to 33 ms; this causes the juddery motion. To remove judder, the TV wants to display each frame for an even amount of time.

[cholla]

@DB83: What OP wants is non sense.

The OP is jaglo.
I did not have much success with his method.
At first I thought I did but not after working with the ffmpeg codes he posted.

[Sharc]

This movie was originally film which should have been 24fps.

Yes.

Then remastered digitally to 29.97 by the studio.
To do this the studio had to add frames.

Yes. But these "new" frames consist of fields of exsting original film frames. The process is described here (see the '2:3 pulldown' section). 2:3 pulldown is basically the same as 3:2 pulldown:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-two_pull_down

That is what was pressed into the commercial DVD disk.

Yes this would be the case for "hard-telecine". You see sometimes hard telecined stuff on Blu-ray discs "Bonus material". For DVD however the more efficient (storage-wise) "soft-telecine" is usually applied. Means the 24fps (actually slowed down to 23.976fps) film frames are stored on the disc plus "flags" are added which instruct the PLAYER or source filter how to perform the telecine during playback time (on the fly). (Sidenote: Sometimes hard-and soft telecine are mixed in a video.)

Your HORSE(01).vob is soft-telecined. No extra frames are added on the disc, just pulldown flags to instruct the player how to deliver the fields to the TV. This is a normal procedure for NTSC DVDs.

If I understand this what IVTC attempts to do is remove the extra frams & convert the video back to 24fps.

Yes. IVTC = Field matching + Decimation. Field matching means grouping the pairs of fields which belong to the same film frame to restore the progressive film frame. The subsequent Decimation removes the duplicates which result from this field matching.
Note that "IVTC" is very simple for pure soft-telecined footage: Simply ignore the pulldown flags.

Even if this is done 24 does not multipy evenly into 60Hz.

Yes. Frame rate conversion of 24 frames per second to 60 fields per second warrants NTSC compatibility, and using the "interlaced" weaving technology of 2:3 pulldown as described (hard or soft) perceptually reduces the judder compared to a simple repetition of every 4th frame.
And yes, a 120Hz monitor would just display every 24fps film frame 5 times. No judder at all.

Telecine using 2:3 pulldown is predominantly used in NTSC (60Hz mains frequency) countries. In PAL (50Hz mains frequency) countries 24fps film is typically just sped up to 25fps, means the movies run 4% faster. In few cases so called 'Euro pulldown' (=2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 pulldown) might be used.

[johnmeyer]

Might as well screw up the frame rate

Can a 23.976 Progressive file be authored to DVD format?

Yes. You always want to encode without adding hard-coded pulldown (i.e., 3:2 repeated fields) and instead just set the pulldown flag. The DVD player will add the pulldown on the fly, but only if going to an old CRT display which is hard-wired for 29.97 fps. For a modern TV, and with a RGB or HDMI connection out of your DVD machine, the DVD player will send the 23.976 progressive video to your display, thus avoiding 3:2 pulldown judder.

jagabo (who knows more about everything than I do) says you can encode other frame rates besides 23.976, then set the pulldown flag, and have the DVD player do the right thing. I do remember that there are some tricks that you can use for these other frame rates, but as I remember, you may have to use something other than "normal" DVD authoring software to make it work.

[cholla]

I changed my AVStoDVD settings from advice in this topic:
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/353284-AVStoDVD-beginners-guide-Any-video-to-DVD-V...e5#post2458043

I usually use the Default setting which you probably did.
It is A2DSource.
Is this correct?

I asked but maybe you missed it among the other stuff.
Did you have AvstiDVD set to use A2DSource?

This setting is made in Preferences/Avisynth in the AVS Video Source Filter pulldown.
If you change it you will need to Save as default & close AVStoDVD & start it again.

[Sharc]

I changed my AVStoDVD settings from advice in this topic:
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/353284-AVStoDVD-beginners-guide-Any-video-to-DVD-V...e5#post2458043

I usually use the Default setting which you probably did.
It is A2DSource.
Is this correct?

I asked but maybe you missed it among the other stuff.
Did you have AvstiDVD set to use A2DSource?

This setting is made in Preferences/Avisynth in the AVS Video Source Filter pulldown.
If you change it you will need to Save as default & close AVStoDVD & start it again.

Yes

[DB83]

The topic you quote from was specific since the member was having issues with the program.

A2DSource is an 'all-in-one' and covers all the other options from that pulldown. If that worked for you, I see no need to change.


Now I note that you have conveniently ignored my earlier contribution. Sure I was blunt in my appraisal of your desired output. One day you may see the error of your ways.


Also you have a most convoluted way to get the video in to AVS2DVD. Sure you have to rip the dvd - no reencoding - but there are programs available to do that. Then there is the classic vob2mpg which will take your ripped vobs (not joined ones) and make a single mpeg2 file - again no reencoding - which you then load in to AVS2DVD. This avoids that interim encode to mp4 will will involve re-encoding and a loss of actual quality since dvd/mpeg2 is lossy to start with.

[DB83]

Just to illustrate my earlier point, I have also prepared a short sample from the original vob but this time only cropping away the letter-boxing. Now one gets a height of 390 pixels but to retain the 16:9 aspect ratio you end up with a width of 664 pixels then filled with side-bars back to 720 pixels. Simply resizing the 664 to 720 you get that horrible stretching.

[Sharc]

@DB83: To whom are you responding?
Whatever, I'll stay away now. Nuff said. It's probably clear to everyone except cholla how this should look.

[DB83]

@DB83: To whom are you responding?

Not you my friend.

[lollo]

@DB83: What OP wants is non sense.

The OP is jaglo.
I did not have much success with his method.
At first I thought I did but not after working with the ffmpeg codes he posted.

Actually, the OP I was referring to is you.

It's probably clear to everyone except cholla how this should look.

I agree.

[cholla]

This is a bit off topic

Similar has been advised to him/her for various final square pixels resolutions (like 1920x1080 which he/she wanted along the discussion). But @cholla repeatedly said that he/she likes it horizontally stretched because in his/her movie theatres the films are stretched as well.... believe it or not. To each his/her own.

@ Sharc,
You have been helpful & I appreciate it.
I have a problem with the post above post.
When a person starts using him/her or he/she it is usually being sarcastic or derogatory,
A way of talking down to someone.

First It should not matter if anyone posting is a Man or Woman.
If it does matter to you try asking.
In my case I am a man.

Some people get confused about my user name & think it is female.
It is just the name of a catus that grows in the western USA;with a lot of thorns.
Prickly like me.
cholla is pronounced diferently than it reads it is pronounced choya.
It gets confused with chola which is pronounced like it reads,
It is Hispanic slang for Gangsta Bitch.

[Sharc]

@ Sharc,
You have been helpful & I appreciate it.
I have a problem with the post above post.
When a person starts using him/her or he/she it is usually being sarcastic or derogatory,
A way of talking down to someone.

No ways. Not my intention to offend anyone in any respect. It's quite the opposite IMHO.
And thanks for the "cholla" clarification.

[cholla]

Now I note that you have conveniently ignored my earlier contribution. Sure I was blunt in my appraisal of your desired output. One day you may see the error of your ways..

@ DB83, I wasn't ignoring you. I disagreed with you.
But here goes.

Cholla, that sample which you are 'happy' with is terrible. As others have mentioned, the aspect ratio is well off so everything is wider/fatter than it should be.

It is some wider than the original & I expected that. Neither you nor anyone else created a video that was 1920x1080 that was not wider than the original 4:3.

The topic you quote from was specific since the member was having issues with the program.

A2DSource is an 'all-in-one' and covers all the other options from that pulldown. If that worked for you, I see no need to change.

I was searching when I found this topic.I did not read the full topic as it was 10 pages & found what I was looking for.
I don't see how it is for just a "member was having issues with the program".
This is because the title is "AVStoDVD beginners guide - Any video to DVD-Video".
Guides usually address many situations.

Also you have a most convoluted way to get the video in to AVS2DVD.

To me it is the way to get the results I want.Which is no bars or pillars on my TV.

Sure you have to rip the dvd - no reencoding - but there are programs available to do that.

I have several & I posted one of them. CloneDVD2 which set to DVD-9 doe not transcode.

Then there is the classic vob2mpg which will take your ripped vobs which you then load in to AVS2DVD,
which you then load in to and make a single mpeg2 file - again no reencodingAVS2DVD.

I have vob2mpgv3 & DVDVob2Mpg(written by the author of IsoBuster).

(not joined ones)

joinvobfilstool is very fast & doesn't encode.
I also have 2 versions of VobMerge also fast & do not encode.[/QUOTE]

This avoids that interim encode to mp4 will will involve re-encoding and a loss of actual quality since dvd/mpeg2 is lossy to start with.

What it will not do is the scale 1920x1080 that I want.

And cholla's earlier comment that you can not take a 4:3 dvd to a 16:9 dvd without stretching is simply wrong

Please explain how to do this. So far I have not seen any video or instructions posted that does this.
jagabo was closest with the avisynth dehaloed & layered.
I'm a novice at using avisynth unless it is in a program like AVStoDVD & since this topic VDub2 to a small degree.

I downloaded & watched your HORSE(01)_no addit crop.mpg (20.50 MB, 2 views) .
It has the problem I wanted to remove side pillers.
It did get rid of the top & bottom bars. I did not yet have time to compare to the .vob to see if anything was lost to the height.

jaglo the actual OP (Original Poster) posted code in the first post.
I had to change it a bit to make it work.
Using it exactly always resulted in a error in ffmpeg & made it Fail to complete.
I will post a video made with those settings.
They also did not do what I wanted.


I

[cholla]

No ways. Not my intention to offend anyone in any respect. It's quite the opposite IMHO.
And thanks for the "cholla" clarification.

Click on the pronunciation button (has the small speaker beside it.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cholla?pronunciation&lang=en_us&dir=c&file=cholla01

Here is the cholla cactus in bloom I have in my backyard:
A different variety than the one in the picture you posted.
There are several varieties.

[Attachment 80608 - Click to enlarge]

[DB83]

@cholla

Why do you even need to go to 1920*1080 if you are creating a dvd ?. AVS2DVD will convert that back to 720*480 16:9.


No one created..... I beg to differ and I explained the standard method when I posted the first version. So again, crop 60 pixels top, 60 pixels bottom to 720*360 (just forget the 1080p nonsense). Now resize that back to 720*480 and encode as 16:9 within avs2dvd. Yes there is a small loss of 18 pixels top and 12 pixels bottom and I could not see any real loss of critical picture since cameramen typically give some leeway.


Now the second version only crops 42 pixels top and 48 pixels bottom so the full active frame is retained. However the 16:9 conversion results in 664*480. So you either stretch (as you have done) or add side-bars. Again, to my eyes, the active video retains the aspect ratio from the letter-boxed dvd.

Now there are many that 'hate' side-bars of any kind (they do not bother me one iota) but stretching to remove them is even worse and a theater, if it does that, should know better. True that in the early days of widescreen tvs content was often stretched but as technology improved......


Now watching that 4:3 + letter-boxing dvd on a wide-screen tv you do end up with side-bars (created by the tv/player) plus the original letter-boxing. But, depending again on the player/tv, surely you could zoom in to remove at least the letter-boxing.

[cholla]

This is resize done by the original poster jaglo's method.
I made as few changes as I needed to.
I removed mpeg2video %1.mpg pad=1280:720=4
I added crop=704:464:714:474 to the beginning settings.
scale=1920:1080 setdar=16/9 to the end settings.

The created video still has top & bottom bars.
I'm posting this as an example of using the OP's code.
The OP jaglo's code with no changes always gave errors in ffmpeg.

[DB83]

So that does explain some of the stretching. Whilst 704 is a valid dvd width one does not see many dvds authored so (I am not even sure that AVS2DVD even allows for that) and I am pretty sure that the original dvd (certainly from your sample which I used) was 720.

But even so that cropping can not remove all the bars for reasons since stated by many.


But, again, scaling to 1920*1080 (unless you want a bluray or PC playback) and scaled back to 720*480 will lose quality, potentially add its own artifacts, is a waste of time.

[cholla]

jaglo's crop was crop=720:400:y=45

I got the code I use for this from my notes on this.
I experimented with it & this was the best result for the Horse video.
I could try it with 720 I do not remember if that caused an error or not in ffmpeg.
I do remember all the crops I used had bars.

I tried your HORSE(01)_cropped+resized.mpg (321.89 MB, 5 views) in AVStoDVD .
The DVD Folder set the audio is badly out of sync.
I did "Direct Stream Copy".
I should have reencoded the audio.
I decided to post pictures instead.
The left picture is from your HORSE(01)_cropped+resized.mpg (321.89 MB, 5 views) after AVStoDVD.
The right picture is from my wider video.
In mine there is more vertical picture.


[Attachment 80613 - Click to enlarge]
[Attachment 80614 - Click to enlarge]




Yours after AVStoDVD did display full screen on my TV played through my BD player.
Also on VLC set to full screen.

[DB83]

I have already explained why you have more vertical picture. It's all down to personal choice although only the first is authentic 16:9 with no bars anywhere after authoring.

[cholla]

This link has the two pictures with a slider comparison.
Since my video was longer it might not be exactly the same frame but close as I know how to get.

https://imgsli.com/Mjc4MjUy

[Sharc]

For some more fun and confusion here two hard-telecined versions (in DVD .vob container), using ffmpeg

...and then same hard-telecine but encoded/flagged as interlaced. Some players like it better