VirtualDub 2 vs original VirtualDub frame rate conversion

[spapakons]

Well after more experimentation, I discovered that Virtualdub 2 does the conversion between NTSC to PAL (29.97fps or 23.976fps to 25fps) well without stuttering. However, my HDMI capture card records video at MJPEG 1920x1080 at 60fps (when used in VirtualDub original or VirtualDub 2).

What's the source resolution and fps?
Why are you converting from 60 fps to 25 fps anyway?

According to MediaInfo, the native compression format of the HDMI capture card is MJPEG at 59.1Mbit/sec 1920x1080 60fps progressive.

And what is the source?

To get the best quality without stuttering I don't use other compression.

MJPEG is already compression, but I understand that you capture without subsequent recompression.

That's an example that VirtualDub2 cannot properly convert to 25fps and stutters, while the original VirtualDub does so perfectly.

I don't see any difference between VDub and VDub2's behavior; the error must lie somewhere else. But this is still far from optimal.

An alternative is to use Handbrake for the frame rate conversion.

If I remember correctly, in Handbrake you can use the TDecimate(mode=0,cycle=12,cycleR=5) filter to change 60fps to 25fps.

PS: To satisfy your curiosity, I edit the video to cut out unwanted scenes and to create an AVCHD folder. (The .AVI file with AVS video and AC3 audio is imported to Multi-AVCHD to create the folder and then I can burn to DVD with Nero Burning ROM). That's why I want to convert to 25fps, to make the video AVCHD compliant, or DVD compliant if I want to create a standard DVD version.

AVCHD supports 60 frames (interlaced).

The source is my laptop (1920x1080 60fps), so I can capture some videos from games or websites. I don't know how Handbrake does it, but I didn't notice any weird movement. The video is always smooth. Yes, I know AVCHD supports 60fps, but I would like to play the results on TV, so I stick with 25fps for maximum compatibility. Also it is easier to convert to DVD if it is 25fps.

PS: OBS doesn't do any conversion. It just captures the laptop video at 25fps, so it is always smooth and perfect. At HEVC compression with adequately high bitrate (20000 Kbps) it has no visible drop in quality without taking too much space on disk.

[rgr]

Any TV will play 60fps if you encode it in 60i (interlaced), which is the basic format supported everywhere (just like 50i). The same goes for DVDs – any player will play 60i. The first source is 25fps with duplicate frames, and it can be converted to 25p. I don't know about the others. And it's better to download online videos than to mess around with them.

[rgr]

If you're capturing from HDMI, then yes, OBS performs the conversion and discards one or two frames. If you're capturing from a screen, the effect is the same.

[spapakons]

Any TV will play 60fps if you encode it in 60i (interlaced), which is the basic format supported everywhere (just like 50i). The same goes for DVDs – any player will play 60i. The first source is 25fps with duplicate frames, and it can be converted to 25p. I don't know about the others. And it's better to download online videos than to mess around with them.

You forgot one little detail. The same video at 60i has more frames (more data) than 25p, so the same bitrate produces slightly less quality. Besides, a progressive video looks much better than an interlaced video. I even convert 50i and 60i videos to 25p and 29.97p before creating a DVD for best quality. This is called "enhanced definition".

[rgr]

Any TV will play 60fps if you encode it in 60i (interlaced), which is the basic format supported everywhere (just like 50i). The same goes for DVDs – any player will play 60i. The first source is 25fps with duplicate frames, and it can be converted to 25p. I don't know about the others. And it's better to download online videos than to mess around with them.

You forgot one little detail. The same video at 60i has more frames (more data) than 25p, so the same bitrate produces slightly less quality. Besides, a progressive video looks much better than an interlaced video. I even convert 50i and 60i videos to 25p and 29.97p before creating a DVD for best quality. This is called "enhanced definition".

Actually, no -- 60i is 30 frames per second, 25p is 25 frames per second, so the bitrate won't be much different. And no, 25p will never look as good as 60i (not even half as good). There's a reason everyone converts analog recordings to 50/60 (i/p) and not 25/30p. Which, by the way, is what your player does with 60i material.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSXSwSUKAvo

[jagabo]

Here's a good 30 second, 60 fps, test video with each frame numbered and smooth panning motion.

[rgr]

Here's a good 30 second, 60 fps, test video with each frame numbered and smooth panning motion.

25p version.

[rgr]

Here's a good 30 second, 60 fps, test video with each frame numbered and smooth panning motion.

25p version.

And 60i version

[spapakons]

Any TV will play 60fps if you encode it in 60i (interlaced), which is the basic format supported everywhere (just like 50i). The same goes for DVDs – any player will play 60i. The first source is 25fps with duplicate frames, and it can be converted to 25p. I don't know about the others. And it's better to download online videos than to mess around with them.

You forgot one little detail. The same video at 60i has more frames (more data) than 25p, so the same bitrate produces slightly less quality. Besides, a progressive video looks much better than an interlaced video. I even convert 50i and 60i videos to 25p and 29.97p before creating a DVD for best quality. This is called "enhanced definition".

Actually, no -- 60i is 30 frames per second, 25p is 25 frames per second, so the bitrate won't be much different. And no, 25p will never look as good as 60i (not even half as good). There's a reason everyone converts analog recordings to 50/60 (i/p) and not 25/30p. Which, by the way, is what your player does with 60i material.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSXSwSUKAvo

It's the old "NTSC at 29.07fps is smoother than PAL at 25fps" debate. Yes, but PAL is higher definition than NTSC and contrary what you may have heard, old PAL 50Hz TVs didn't flicker. Trying to convert 25fps video to NTSC by 80's crappy electronics produces imperfect flickering video, hence the myth that PAL flickers. Similarly I prefer better looking progressive video at 25fps than "smoother" (but worse looking) interlaced video at 50i or 60i.

[rgr]

It depends on what your source is -- if it's 50 or 60fps (without dups), then of course it will be better to encode it in 50i and 60i.