3 Replies Latest reply on Nov 8, 2008 5:57 AM by Jim_Simon

    Sony's Cineframe vs progressive

    Level 1
      a) Given footage in 1080i and *cineframe on * ( and I think this is relevant for FX1, FX7, A1 ++) - what would the correct settings be for a native project in ppro? Progressive or interlaced ?

      b) assuming same footage - what would the correct settings be in Cineform's HD link when importing. Progressive og interlaced?

      My question is basically what impact this Cineframe option has. Ppro , as i've experienced it always "misinterpret" this sort of footage as interlaced - giving harsh "frame doubling" when shooting high motion sceenes.
        • 1. Re: Sony's Cineframe vs progressive
          Dan Isaacs Level 2
          Hey Idar --

          I wish I could better answer your questions, but I don't really have much experience with "Cineframe" -- and less so with the European market version of Sony's HDV cameras.

          My general recommendation would be not to use Cineframe -- especially for high-motion stuff -- and to avoid mixing Cineframe and normal 50i footage when possible.

          If you do need to incorporate 1080i footage along with your Cineframe stuff, then consider pre-deinterlacing your 1080i footage to match the 25p stuff.

          Assuming all of your footage is Cineframe, I'd use progressive in HD Link and edit in a 25p project preset. From a technical standpoint, your Cineframe footage is (I think?) very much the same as so-called "25p over 50i" footage, meaning it progressive in appearance but interlaced in frame structure.

          Hopefully when you set "progressive" in HD Link it's smart enough to decode as interlaced ("i" and "p" use different subsampling) but encode as progressive -- without deinterlacing it.

          I (of course) have alternate ideas for how you could achieve all of this. Drop me an email if you're interested.

          How much of this Cineframe footage have you already acquired?

          -- Dan
          • 2. Re: Sony's Cineframe vs progressive
            Level 1
            Thank you Dan. Under normal circumstances this distinction between (i) and (p) is just of minor interest to me. And I do not mix interlaced with progressive footage.
            But when it comes to footage with high motion sceenes( even made worse by wide_angle_shooting (0.5))this is *very* interesting to me. Normally i shoot with *cineframe off*, but for some odd reason I have 4 hours valuable footage with *cineframe on* - and reshooting is not an option.
            I've tested a number of approaches but it seems impossible to export from ppro without having these ugly - not combing - but sligthly offset frames apparent at the picture borders - if you understand what I mean.
            May I mention a remarkable observation though: If i export my footage as CFHD (lossless) and in succession put this file in procoder3, specify a AVI target , using CanopusDV (DVCPro25) encoder - this clearly improves the final result. How come?
            Now - I'm on thin ice here, but I guess that I'd prefer * shutter times at 1/1000- 1/2000 and cineframe on* in order to achieve sharp, progressive looking film.
            Some motion blur is accepted by me but this "frame offset tendency" is not.
            Maybe this is all a consequence of Sony's rolling shutter ??
            Anyway Dan, you have my private email adress (your's is at work and i'm sitting back home disabled with a newly operated shoulder!),--- I would appreciate some alternate suggestions/ considerations
            • 3. Re: Sony's Cineframe vs progressive
              Jim_Simon Level 8
              To the best of my knowledge, Cineframe is Sony's way of faking a progressive signal. The actual imaging devices are interlaced. Sony uses electronic trickery to simulate progressive from the interlaced chips, whereas Panasonic uses genuine progressive chips and so calls their modes "progressive".

              Not sure that helps much to solve the problem, though.