VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4
FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 97
Thread
  1. Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    Originally Posted by Sharc
    Is the light source of your projector stable (driven from a stabilized DC source)
    Ceiling LED through a 24v DC driver and dimmer.
    That's probably pulse width modulated.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse-width_modulation

    See the "duty cycle" section. The LED is turning off and on at a high rate. That would explain why you never see a full frame.
    Ahhh! Here we go. I am pretty sure this is the culprit. It acts like an additional, unsynchronized shutter.
    Quote Quote  
  2. Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    See the "duty cycle" section. The LED is turning off and on at a high rate. That would explain why you never see a full frame.
    Great insight, jagabo. I never would have thought of that, but I'll be you're correct.

    [edit]It still doesn't explain why you see movement behind the black bar, unless that bar is something other than the shutter blade.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Originally Posted by johnmeyer View Post
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    See the "duty cycle" section. The LED is turning off and on at a high rate. That would explain why you never see a full frame.
    Great insight, jagabo. I never would have thought of that, but I'll be you're correct.

    [edit]It still doesn't explain why you see movement behind the black bar, unless that bar is something other than the shutter blade.
    I think this depends how the CMOS matrix of the videocam is written/read out and how the real shutter happens to coincide with the "LED shutter (chopper)".
    Let's see what the OP gets with a decent, steady light source.
    Last edited by Sharc; 21st Sep 2023 at 01:58.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    It wasn't the lighting, it was my camera. I was using a Canon HV20 with CMOS. I changed to a Panasonic GS300 3CCD at 1000/sec and got full frames. Phew.

    That's a bummer because I liked the 1920x1080 capture via HDMI. Now I'm stuck with Composite.

    Now I'm after a script that will find and remove black or partially-black frames.
    Image Attached Files
    Quote Quote  
  5. Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    It wasn't the lighting, it was my camera. I was using a Canon HV20 with CMOS. I changed to a Panasonic GS300 3CCD at 1000/sec and got full frames. Phew.
    Ah, an unexpected "rolling shutter" artifact. Interesting.

    OK, now you're cooking with gas. Everything looks good except for one more thing: you either have to use manual exposure, or find a setting which slows down the auto-exposure response time. You will see that after each black frame, the next frame is over-exposed because the auto-exposure can't respond fast enough. This is unacceptable. It is why I removed the shutter from my transfer system. I briefly looked at the manual for your GS300, and it has only limited manual exposure control. You definitely can set the aperture and and shutter speed, and that should work for any given scene, but since movie exposure wanders all over the place, that is probably not a viable option.

    However, you are definitely on the correct path.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    John, your wish is my command. Here is the canoe again at 1/1000 and F2.8.
    Image Attached Files
    Quote Quote  
  7. I remember now why I removed the shutter from my projector. The problem is that because the projector and video camera are not synchronized, you can end up with a "beat" where the shutter closure and the instantaneous picture capture can coincide for a few frames. You end up with multiple black frames, and you can even miss one or more frames. In the extreme example, you would get nothing but black, and no image at all (see diagram below to see how this is possible).

    The shutter also messes up the exposure because the camera can't react fast enough to the alternation between pure black and an image that is so bright that it almost overwhelms the camera.

    You probably have a 3 blade projector shutter which means that the shutter closes two times for each projected frame and then the film is pulled down during the third shutter closure. Having multiple blades increases the flicker rate so your eye do not perceive flicker. You would otherwise get a headache if the picture flickered even at 24 fps, much less 18 or 16 for silent film.

    You have to actually draw out a timeline showing how long each frame is projected, and how long each shutter closure lasts, and then determine how many fps you need to ensure that the camera always gets at least one clear capture of a film frame for each and every frame of film.

    With a three-bladed shutter, you end up with six images for every frame of film (three duplicates of the frame, and three periods of black). So, if you've slowed down the projector to 15 fps, you get 90 images per second.

    The following crude timing diagram shows the issue. The bottom part shows one frame of film being projected three times, with the black parts being the period the shutter is closed and the clear part the period when the image is projected. It assumes that the angle of the shutter blade is exactly the same for the period that it is closed and the period it is open. That may or may not be the case on your projector. The thin vertical lines are meant to show the near instantaneous capture of your video camera using an unrealistic 1/100,000 second shutter speed. I did this just to make the drawing easier to understand. If you were to do a better job, those lines need to have a width equal to the actual duration of the shutter opening.



    What you need to do is cut the diagram between the top and bottom part and slide the top part left and right to make sure that there is always one thin line which is inside the white part of the diagram below. This means you will get one good capture for each frame of film. However, if you find that, when you re-draw the diagram to represent your actual projector speed and camera speed (18 fps and 50 fps), you may find that there is a situation where each video capture always lines up within the black on the diagram below which means you will have completely missed capturing that frame of film.

    What you'd need to do is draw this more accurately, and create a width for each video capture line; show the correct proportion between the shutter opening and closing; and have the correct duration of a frame. I used 60 fps because it is four in the morning, I can't sleep, and the math and measurement was easier. You'd need to draw it for 50 fps, and then adjust everything for whatever is the slowest fps you at which you can set your projector.

    The only thing you really have control over, unless you can get a 60 fps (or higher) camera, is the projector speed.

    The other thing you can do is to invent a capture system which uses a signalling device slaved to the projector which tells your camera when to "click" and take a picture. This is what "VideoFred" did with his system, and is what Roger Evans does with his Moviestuff Workprinter units.

    So, I apologize for not remembering all the steps I went through which lead me to remove the shutter. With the shutter removed, the system works great, as you can see from this film, taken in 1928, that I captured over a decade ago.

    1928 Oak Park River Forest High School Marching Band & Football
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    No apologies needed, John! Your knowledge is great and very helpful. I'd like to try to pull my projector apart, but that will have to wait for another time.

    Now that I've swapped to the CCD camera, I'm finding that at 1/50 shutter speed, the non-flickering speed band for the projector is much larger than my CMOS camera, and so I am using that. I've been experimenting with Cycle and CycleR and come up with 12 and 8, which gives movement on every frame (no dupes at all) and very few blends. This video looks good to me.

    Ironically, my clip frame rate is 16.67, so I am back to square one, but now, for some reason, AssumeFPS(18) is working and my video speed looks good.

    I was intrigued by your 1928 footage. Of more interest to me was the 12FPS 1928 game of the boys, which has lots of close up movement and is quite jerky. I would love to see what Framerateconverter or RIFE could do in that situation.

    https://youtu.be/1YekFxBYKNM

    Once again, thanks very much for your input.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Your decision to go back to the slow shutter speed is a good one. I didn't realize that the CMOS rolling shutter of your original camera was causing the problem. Now that you've solved that, if you get the correct slow shutter speed, you can minimize the flicker and get a reasonable capture. You won't, however, be able to do much post processing (such as dirt removal) without a true "frame-accurate" capture because the remaining blended frames screw that up.

    BTW, if you want to see why the rolling shutter in your CMOS camera screwed things up, go to YouTube and enter

    Rolling shutter CMOS propeller

    you'll get a list of really good videos showing what a CMOS camera does when shooting through an airplane propeller. The shutter on your projector is pretty much the same thing: a rotating metal blade.

    It sounds like you have something which is going to work well enough for you to get through the project.

    As for changing frame rate on my 12 fps backyard football, I definitely considered that, and have done it on a few of my uploaded videos. However, you have to live with the unavoidable artifacts. Here is my capture of a 1940 parade in Flint, Michigan queued up to when the stuffed reindeer goes by. Look at the antlers. Ugly stuff.

    1940 Flint Michigan Parade

    The reason I used motion estimation to add in-between frames on this video was that there was a lot of panning, and at low shutter speeds the persistence of vision judder (the artifact is entirely in your head) was too distracting. If you look at other scenes from the clip, it does look nice and smooth.

    [edit]P.S. The Flint, MI parade transfer was also done with my shutterless Eiki 16mm projector, using a method I was actually thinking of patenting. My method uses TFM to provide metrics followed by my own matching algorithms, which I prototyped using an Excel spreadsheet. My spreadsheet code use the TFM metrics to decimate duplicates. It was actually even more complicated than you might think because it used a camera which took interlaced video and I had to sometimes recombine the lower field from one frame with the upper field on the next frame, and vice versa. I then found out it was going to cost $50,000 just for the provisional patent (legal fees) and decided my vanity (of having a patent) wasn't worth that amount of money.
    Last edited by johnmeyer; 21st Sep 2023 at 11:53.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Look at the antlers. Ugly stuff.
    Got a short, not speed up, sample of that ? I'd like to add it to my clips for interpolation tests.

    Cu Selur
    users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555
    Quote Quote  
  11. Originally Posted by Selur View Post
    Look at the antlers. Ugly stuff.
    Got a short, not speed up, sample of that ? I'd like to add it to my clips for interpolation tests.

    Cu Selur
    Let me poke around. If you ever get to the doom9.org forum, I gave StainlessS that clip a decade ago and he keeps using it for testing various things. I still have it on one of my 20+ drives, but it will be easier if I can find it where I uploaded it.

    [edit]I found just the antlers clip. It is unmodified from the original (i.e., it is my original capture, without any motion estimation applied, although I did apply dirt removal).

    Flint Michigan Parade Antlers

    If you want more of that video, I'll have to look around some more.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    John, I ran your 1928 kid's football game 12fps Youtube video through framerate converter (24) and it came out really well, much smoother and very easy to watch. The secret is obviously having clean images to start with.
    Quote Quote  
  13. @johnmeyer: Thanks! That is enough, just like to collect samples to test interpolation methods.

    Cu Selur
    users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Jagabo
    AssumeFPS() can adjust the audio too. Use the sync_audio=true argument:

    http://avisynth.nl/index.php/AssumeFPS

    It syncs the audio by changing the sample rate. You'll usually want to resample back to standard audio rate with SSRC. The AssumeFPS page has an example of that.
    Thanks Jagabo, got that working nicely.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    John, your wish is my command. Here is the canoe again at 1/1000 and F2.8.
    Aside from all the other problems, why is that video 50 fps? Interlaced PALshould be 25 frames per second.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    John, your wish is my command. Here is the canoe again at 1/1000 and F2.8.
    Aside from all the other problems, why is that video 50 fps? Interlaced PALshould be 25 frames per second.
    This has confused me as well. I concluded that his Panasonic 3CCD videocam can take SD at 50 interlaced frames per second (50i). If so (?), it's not PAL compliant but for the purpose of his re-filming of the cine8, a high sampling rate will be beneficial (100 fields per second) to prevent missing of cine8 film frames.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Originally Posted by Sharc View Post
    I concluded that his Panasonic 3CCD videocam can take SD at 50 interlaced frames per second (50i)
    I suspect the OP just didn't have the capture device/program set up properly. The field order of the video makes no sense.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    I suspect the OP just didn't have the capture device/program set up properly. The field order of the video makes no sense.
    Yes. I noted the weird and inconsistent field order as well. Something must have went wrong.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    Could you guys please explain how you're determining my "weird and inconsistent" field order? If I learn how to analyse, then I can do things more correctly.

    The capture program was AmarecTV with a GV-USB2. What is the problem with capturing at 50fps?

    Re the 25/50, AssumeFPS appears to works correctly with a 50fps source that has been TFM/TDecimated down to 16.67 speed. A 25fps source in AssumeFPS (TFMed down to 8.333 speed) produces a video that runs far too quickly (as I have mentioned upthread).
    Quote Quote  
  20. Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    Could you guys please explain how you're determining my "weird and inconsistent" field order? If I learn how to analyse, then I can do things more correctly.
    Each frame of interlaced video contains two different picture, taken at different times. When you watch the video you're supposed to see those two different pictures one at a time and sequentially. If you see them in the wrong temporal order you will get jerky back and forth motion. Apply Bob() or SeparateFields(), then step through the video frame by frame (really field by field now) . If you see the wrong temporal order the field order is backwards, use AssumeTFF() or AssumeBFF() to fix the field order. The problem with your clip is that whether you AssumeTFF() or AssumeBFF() some portions of the video have the correct temporal order, some not. I suspect AmarecTV is screwing up because you've told it to capture in a format that doesn't make sense.

    Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    The capture program was AmarecTV with a GV-USB2. What is the problem with capturing at 50fps?
    There's no such thing as 50 frame per second interlaced video in the industry. When you see MediaInfo report 50i, or some manufacturer list support for 50i, it's really 25i. (25 interlaced frames per second, 50 fields per second). It's the same for 30i and 60i in NTSC areas.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    I see it!
    Quote Quote  
  22. Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    The problem with your clip is that whether you AssumeTFF() or AssumeBFF() some portions of the video have the correct temporal order, some not. I suspect AmarecTV is screwing up because you've told it to capture in a format that doesn't make sense.

    Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    The capture program was AmarecTV with a GV-USB2. What is the problem with capturing at 50fps?
    There's no such thing as 50 frame per second interlaced video in the industry. When you see MediaInfo report 50i, or some manufacturer list support for 50i, it's really 25i. (25 interlaced frames per second, 50 fields per second). It's the same for 30i and 60i in NTSC areas.
    The longer the more I suspect the mess is related to the capture driver version of the GV-USB2, possibly in combination with the AmarecTV framerate options, see the discussion here:
    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/411694-IO-Data-GV-USB2-112-Driver-Minimum-Capture-fps-is-50
    I doubted that Alwyn's PAL camera can take 100 fields per second, but didn't really know for sure.
    Whatever, one more confirmation that one should ALWAYS manually inspect the fields sequence when "interlaced" is on the agenda.
    Last edited by Sharc; 23rd Sep 2023 at 02:17.
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Sharc
    The longer the more I suspect the mess is related to the capture driver version of the GV-USB2
    No it's not, the same field order reversal occurs with the Startech USB3HDCAP.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    Originally Posted by Sharc
    The longer the more I suspect the mess is related to the capture driver version of the GV-USB2
    No it's not, the same field order reversal occurs with the Startech USB3HDCAP.
    Does it work correctly (framerate, fieldrate, parity) with a "normal natural" clip taken with this camera, then captured via S-Video or Composite (or whichever interface of the GS300 you are using) using your current OS, capture tool, capture devices and drivers?

    Added:
    I took a look to the manual. The GS300 (PAL) doesn't support 50 interlaced frames per second (aka 100 fields per second). It records 50 fields per second which get woven to 25 interlaced frames per second, so the format is the standard PAL 25i (=25 interlaced frames per second, sometimes called 50i referring to the 50 fields per second).

    So something went wrong with the capture process it seems. (I refer to the file 'GS300 Canoe 1-000 F2-8.avi' of post#36).
    The fields with changing parity can be matched using TFM() though, see below.

    Added2:
    Here a script for visualizing:
    Code:
    AVISource("GS300 Canoe 1-000 F2-8.avi")
    
    clip=last
    clip=clip.showframenumber(scroll=true,x=60,y=260,size=36).showtime(x=100,y=286)
    even=clip.separatefields().selecteven().subtitle("EVEN (TOP) field",size=36,align=5)
    odd=clip.separatefields().selectodd().subtitle("ODD (BOTTOM) field",size=36,align=5)
    split=stackvertical(even,odd)
    
    matched=clip.TFM(mode=1,pp=6,display=true ).subtitle("MATCHED",size=36,align=5)  #pp=0 for no posprocessing of combed frames 
    
    return stackhorizontal(clip,split,matched)
    Example for frame 149:
    Image Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	frame 149.png
Views:	7
Size:	1.33 MB
ID:	73992  

    Last edited by Sharc; 23rd Sep 2023 at 07:19.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Originally Posted by Sharc View Post
    The fields with changing parity can be matched using TFM() though.
    Not really. If you turn off the post processing (deinterlacing) you'll find that there's no match much of the time. Ie, some film frames only appear as one field in the video. You can verify this with Bob() or SeparateFields(). And it looks like there are many missing film frames from the jumps in motion. There's no point in dealing with this cap.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Right. See my script above and set TFM(pp=0) for no postprocessing to see the orphans.
    For example frame 64 with pp=0.


    There's no point in dealing with this cap.
    Agree. After desparate attempts
    Image Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	frame 64.png
Views:	8
Size:	941.4 KB
ID:	73994  

    Last edited by Sharc; 23rd Sep 2023 at 07:35.
    Quote Quote  
  27. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    Thanks both, that particular file was only for John because he wanted a 1/000th of a second shutter speed to freeze the frames.

    Here's a more "conventional" file. I've also attached a USB-Live Stream DV capture. What's your impression of that DV for working on?

    My current workflow: Deinterlace with QTGMC to 50fps. Take that new file > Apply TFM, TDecimate c12-cr8, Framerate converter to 25fps. If I try to combine all of that in one AVS, it doesn't turn out as nicely (in fact it's ugly). If I feed the second group with 50fps Progressive, it comes out much better. Still a number of blends, but no dupes that I can see. I don't use AssumeFPS at all.
    Image Attached Files
    Quote Quote  
  28. This worked for me:

    Code:
    LWLibavVideoSource("GV 25FPS LAGS(20230923-1956) Snip.avi") 
    FlipVertical()
    AssumeBFF()
    QTGMC(preset="fast")
    ConvertToYV12()
    SRestore(frate=17) # alternate: 16.66666667
    FrameRateConverter(newnum=25000, newden=1000)
    Image Attached Files
    Quote Quote  
  29. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    That's a killer, Jagabo, thanks. My plugins folder is ever increasing in size.

    What's your opinion on the black bars: I'm obviously going to chop them all off and make it 4:3, but do they affect/upset AVISynth functions? Should I get rid of them before running the script?
    Quote Quote  
  30. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia-PAL Land
    Search Comp PM
    One more question: that was the first ever analogue AVI I've captured that ended up BFF. Why would that have been?
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

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