This content has been marked as final. Show 5 replies
You can use the Timewarp effect to do that to some degree. Interpret your footage as 59.94fps, turn fields off. Put it in a pre-comp, time-stretch it by 200%. Then apply the Timewarp effect with 50% Speed to your pre-comp to bring your footage back to normal speed. This will interpolate the fields with motion estimation. Alternatively, use Magic Bulled Frames or RevisionFX' FieldsKit to employ the same technique. You can also "build" a progressive version by importing the source clip twice with different field interpretation and then recombining those different interpretations based on manipulating the framerates as described above. However, it's not going to look as perfect...
Actually, the easiest way is to interpret your footage as "Separate Fields: Upper Field" (since I'm guessing you have HDV footage) enable "preserve Edges" and then render out via the Render Queue with "Field Render: Off" to a lossless format, such as QuickTime Animation @100%.
Do a quick comparison and see if AE's built-in de-interlacing is good enough for your requirements...
- Jonas Hummelstrand
So you are saying I should take the NTSC footage I have and interpret the footage to:
Separate Fields: Upper Field and enable "preserve edges" and then render out with Field Render: Off to a lossless format.
This end result would be the video footage in progressive format?
Then Import it back into AE or PP and use the Instant HD plug-in and the results should be better.
Okay, I will try that.
The results looked pretty good without putting the video into progressive format. I just want to compare and see which is better.
AE's built-in de-interlacing is the process mentioned above? If not, how do you de-interlace footage in AE?
So after de-interlacing video, it is considered progressive format?
Thanks for the help.
If you are starting from SD footage, chances are the field dominance is lower, not upper. Check the specs of the device used to record/capture to be sure, of course.
>This end result would be the video footage in progressive format?
It swaps the fields in time and if the temporal difference between them is not too big, it will look like a progressive frame. However, if you have extremely fast motion or the motion happens close to the camera, thus covering large distances in the image are, it's not going to work. Anyway, just use whatever method you feel most comfortable with and gives the results you desire in the least amount of time.