I'm working on a small video project where the footage came to me as files off of a Canon Vixia HF R10 camcorder, with the settings set to 1440x1080 HD anamorphic (1.333), at 60i. The file format is a .mts, an MPEG2 stream. I just needed to make several quick edits and then export the video with those cuts; no other processing or changing of anything. I don't want to de-interlace it or encode in a wildly different and/or lossy format, as it needs to match other video clips from that camera as faithfully as possible.
So I've made the cuts in Premiere Pro CS6...what format and what settings do I need to encode this thing to meet my requirements? I tried an h.264 at a high bitrate, using all the settings I mentioned above, but upon exporting, playback in Windows Media Player shows funky field artifacts from interlacing, almost like it used the wrong field order (but every analysis said it was Upper first), or it was trying to play it in 30p instead of properly flagging to play at 60i. How can I get it to play at liquid smooth 60i in WMP just like the original files?
(I hope I never have to deal with anything interlaced again...such an unnecessary relic left over from the past!)
Thanks in advance, everyone!
First, WMP is not a very good player. KM Player and VLC are far superior.
Second, viewing interlaced clips on a computer monitor will show interlacing artifacts if not deinterlaced by the player. This is normal and nothing to worry about.
I use VLC as well, but I have yet to find a single interlaced video that plays back properly with VLC (perhaps you have to tinker like crazy with the settings for this to happen?). All I know is that the video straight off the camera played back at proper 60i with no artifacts present using WMP. After just a few cuts and export, regardless of settings, I cannot get it to play back correctly. Whatever WMP is doing in this unique case in regards to handling interlaced video is what I would like to see with my export, at least. Can you recommend the correct settings then to get 60fps deinterlaced playback of 60i material using VLC instead of looking like 30fps with nasty fields visible all over? I would just like to see if I managed to get the proper field order and interlaced encoding to perfectly match the original unedited video, because currently it doesn't look like I have.
The correct settings depend on the intended use. For further editing, you want an export that matches the original in frame size, frame rate, Pixel Aspect Ratio, and field order. Whether or not that export also plays back on a computer is incidental. If you want an export that plays back on a computer or for upload to the Internet, you'll want a progressive export at a matching frame rate and a 1.0 PAR, however that would not be a good choice for further editing.
I'm not going to be doing any additional editing to this, we're going to be handing off the footage to someone else who may do so. Most likely yes, they will be throwing it up on YouTube or using it internally. I guess what I'm asking more about is the intricacies of how different video formats handle and set flags for various media players in regards to interlacing, and if there's any way to manipulate that using Adobe Media Encoder. I don't care what they're using it for, this is more seeking knowledge so that I'm more familiar with working with interlaced source material should I have to again.
The fact is, I can get the original to play back with the appearance of smooth 60hz with no evidence of interlacing (similar to how it would look on a good HDTV that has proper deinterlacing and processing of 60i material) using WMP, and on VLC if I force deinterlacing using the Yadif (2x) mode, though after a few seconds of playback that gets very stuttery and choppy. I cannot, under any circumstance, get any of my own encodings of this material to look like that. It always, regardless of what deinterlacing filter I use or what player, looks like 30p with nasty interlace artifacts. In VLC forcing deinterlacing on the encoded interlaced material appeared to have absolutely no effect whatsoever, where in the original every different mode exhibited different looking results, with Yadif (2x) displaying the closest motion to how it would look on an old CRT or HDTV with proper deinterlacing.
we're going to be handing off the footage to someone else who may do [further editing]
Well then you have your answer.
"...you want an export that matches the original in frame size, frame rate, Pixel Aspect Ratio, and field order. Whether or not that export also plays back on a computer is incidental."
I'd still like the rest of the information I'm asking about for the future, and to better understand how all of this works. Moreover, if I hand this to them to play back as-is and they decide to not edit it further, it doesn't look good when played on a computer. They may want to just play the files off a laptop, and then what? One section will look obviously inferior and problematic compared to the other files. This is a potential issue that I just want resolved. I'd like to know how to control every aspect of this as opposed to swinging in the dark for the right settings to get me proper pc media player playback of this to exactly match the original. Regardless of what I'm going to be doing with this or who I'm handing this off to later. Knowing more about the interlacing encoding process and subsequent playback on various PC media players was the original intent of this post.
if I hand this to them to play back as-is and they decide to not edit it further, it doesn't look good when played on a computer.
True, but not relevant. You need a different export for computer playback. If you want to make sure they have something useable for both editing and computer playback, export twice and send them both.
In case anyone else has this question, it looks like I had to use MPEG2 with Level set to "High 1440" to deal with HD video (may not be necessary), and the rest of the settings same as the original (as they should be in this case). Set bitrate to taste to avoid recompression artifacts. Apparently MPEG2 seems to preserve interlaced source material for PC playback more reliably than h.264 or other codecs (makes sense considering its original intended purpose involved a lot of interlaced stuff). This is all I was really looking for.
I know this format is not ideal for upload to YouTube or general computer use. If I was preparing the footage for that myself I wouldn't have needed to pop on the forums at all. It's just been a long time since I've worked with interlaced material without wanting to convert it to 30p or 24p.
Thanks anyways for your time, I know it was a weird question and my intentions with it weren't initially clear.
Anyone who works with video finds it annoying and surprising that most computer monitors and software players refuse to display interlaced video correctly, and insist on combining two fields into a single frame, and then showing it as a progressive video. I am interested to know if even some modern TVs are doing this with interlaced video; the specs are capable of being twisted by mealy-mouthed sales types. I guess we need someone with an ultra high speed camera to get some close ups on TVs and watch to see for sure if alternating fields are refreshed as they are supposed to be with interlaced video. If it's shot interlaced, it should be displayed that way, and if it's shot progressive, it should be displayed progressive. But I digress!
This sad fact means video for computers has to be encoded differently from video for televisions, if that video was shot using an interlaced format.
And I don't think any player will parse interlaced video to show correctly, even with 60 Hz or higher refresh rates on decent monitors. I can't see a way for VLC to do it. Mplayer won't. I am unsure if Ffmpeg's player will. That would be interesting if it could...
If it's shot interlaced, it should be displayed that way, and if it's shot progressive, it should be displayed progressive.
I can't argue with that. Unfortunately, consumers have chosen style over substance, and the only TV technology capable of doing what is best - CRT - can no longer be purchased.
Hi. I have the same issue as initially posted here. I have a Sony WX-50 that shoots 1080i60. When I look at this MTS file in WMP or VLC(with the deinterlaced set to Bob) it looks great- motion is fluid as mentioned above. When I do edits and re encode to uncompressed AVI or uncompressed MOV or MP4 with Upper Field and no deinterlace set in Sony Vegas....the video interlace is horrible with waves and blurs, etc. on both players. I have deinterlaced the video into several formats but all lose the "fluid" motion of 60i. It does look ok in the players but minus this "fluid" 60i motion. Suggestions please for re encoding and keeping the interlacing correct so it plays back close to the original's MTS file's smoothness?...Thanks, Steve I use Handbrake and Sony Vegas
I tried some re encoding again using diferent codecs and discovered that when I rencode my MTS files (1080i)
from my camera I cannot retain the smoothness of 1080i in the new video file (as mentioned above) UNLESS it is a MPEG2 transport stream file like a M2T or M2TS. Then, the "fluid" or smoothness of the original 1080i MTS video is maintained. But when encoding it to a MPG file configured to DVD standards - it doesn't keep this smoothness. I guess I can't keep it if I make DVDs but Blu rays should be ok. Thoughts? Thanks.