Hello all, I've got a question about the Movie Mode feature on the GL2 camera. Lately I've been replaying video slowed down to around 50% and there are noticable image artifacts that look like Interlaced scan rate lines. Would the Movie Mode setting help correct this, or are there settings for Progressive scan rate instead?

Does your editing software not offer de-interlacing, or other smoothing?

I am using Ulead Media Studio Pro 8, but I also have Premeier Elements and Ulead Videostudio 9. I have not seen or tried anything like smoothing or a de-interlacing filter. I'll dig deeper into the program and check it out.

Hello all, I've got a question about the Movie Mode feature on the GL2 camera. Lately I've been replaying video slowed down to around 50% and there are noticable image artifacts that look like Interlaced scan rate lines. Would the Movie Mode setting help correct this, or are there settings for Progressive scan rate instead?Yes, the GL2's frame mode virtually eliminates that comb-like effect that appears on fast moving edges in 60i mode. The trade-off is a bit of jerkiness in the motion which some people sense at normal speed and which will probably be accentuated at half-speed.

I just got out of a showing with a couple for a wedding, and they asked me a couple of times how I got the "film effect". The answer is that I just shoot in "Frame Mode". It's that simple. To me it doesn't really look all that filmish, but apparently it does to a lot of people. I also use a lot of slow motion with frame mode, and I don't get artifacts or lines. I've gone as low as 25-30% speed and it's still okay. I usually try not to go below 50%, though.

My partner and I have been videoing in frame mode far about 6 months. We noticed after our first sporting event on dvd that when we freeze frame the picture looked terrible. I did some reading and we switched to Frame Mode. My partner complained at first when filming at a footbal game that the picture was "jumpy" but he got used to it. It never bothered me. I love the look.

My partner and I have been videoing in frame mode far about 6 months. We noticed after our first sporting event on dvd that when we freeze frame the picture looked terrible. I did some reading and we switched to Frame Mode. My partner complained at first when filming at a footbal game that the picture was "jumpy" but he got used to it. It never bothered me. I love the look.

Jay? - "My partner and I have been videoing in frame mode far about 6 months. " . . ok, then you say, " . . . on dvd that when we freeze frame the picture looked terrible." . . . and we switched to Frame Mode. " So ARE you filming in Film Mode now? And were you when your partner saw the freeze frame?

Regards,

Grazie

jay,

I film mostly action stuff. It was from suggestions from this list that I started using frame mode. I have some superlative footage and definitively have had less issues with slow motion. I have found that going below 60% it is also useful to use a slow motion software package. If I had the cash I would shoot frame and then use twixtor.


Dale

I have both a GL-2 and a DVX-100A. The video from these two cameras, with the GL-2 in frame mode and the DVX-100 at 30 FPS looks very different. In slow-motion playback you can easily see the frames on the DVX recording, but the frames from the GL-2 are much smoother and more difficult to identify. I also found that neither the GL-2 manuel nor the Cannon web-site say much about what is really going on in the frame mode. I have noted some comments on this user board about a loss of resolution when using the GL-2 in frame mode. My question to those who are very knowledgable about this subject is whether it is better to record in interlaced mode and to then de-interlace in post-production, or to shoot with the GL-2 in frame mode, especially with regards to resolution.

Mark,
Go to post #6 in this thread, where Boyd Ostroff corrects my oversimplification of Frame Mode with a Panasonic link that compares frame mode to true progressive in great detail.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=56153&highlight=gl2+frame+mode

What it boils down to is that you get 480 lines of resolution with true progressive, 360 lines with 60i and 320 lines with frame mode. That 40 lines isn't much of a price to pay for for many viewers, used to NTSC broadcasts at 330 lines anyway.

And the subject becomes so deep when deterministic factors mix with probablistic factors (e.g. random pixel straddling of some image edges), and objective factors mix with subjective ones, that there are some experts who will say that even with DVD played on regular TVs you get only about 340 lines.

Anyway, if I interpreted the article at the above link correctly, I don't think that there is any way to deinterlace in post that won't cost just as much in terms of resolution as frame mode.

Fred - Thanks so much for that link ! The article was outstanding, and answered all of my questions. Its really nice to have access to such a community of helpful professionals. Best regards, Mark

You know... With all this knowledge I now have about video, I still don't know how I can go to my wife and explain to her "Honey, I know I just bought a $2,000.00 camera... but I need a new one that is 16:9 native 3CCD chip, 1024 Progressive scan." -long pause- SMACK!!!!!

I shoot mostly action sports and always shoot with frame mode. I use the frame mode but adjust my set up levels to increase the sharpness, color saturation, etc. i also run a shutter speed of anywhere between 500-2000 as well, depending on lighting conditions, lens filters, and so on. when i cut and edit i can (throught pp1.5) bring the speed down to about 30% and have the shot be just as clear as it was at 100%, just be sure to find and uncheck the frame blend for speed changes selection...

In all actuality the only time i do not use the frame mode is in extreme low light situations, this is because i have noticed that the shots i get are really grainy as opposed to the standard mode, which is only slightly grainy...

Chris,

would you explain the frame blend thing?? Is that in post or is that something on the camera I am not aware of!!





dale guthormsen

Chris,

would you explain the frame blend thing?? Is that in post or is that something on the camera I am not aware of!!





dale guthormsen

sure! what i am talking about is in post if you work with premiere 1.5 (not sure about older versions).

when you are working in pp and add a clip to the time line, you can right click the clip and it pulls up a menu right? in this menu is a selection for field options (which btw, is the same selection for the de-interlace options). at the bottom of this little menu there is a checked box for "frame blend speed changes", why this box is checked by default i do not know, most of the work i have done and have seen or talked with others about involves always unchecking this selection.

i used to get nasty slo mo shots and when i would use a speed increase for comedic effect it was so bad you could not get any kind of focus with the shot, then i found this little puppy and probably about 90% of my problems were fixed. some of the fast motion stuff is still a little shaky but better than it was...

i mentioned the adjustment of set up levels before as a way to fight the lowered resolution with the frame mode, not sure if it was clear when i first said something. there is a sharpness setting that i jack up pretty high to compensate and to the naked eye it does a decent enough job. that combined with a higher shutter speed is one of the ways i have been able to still retain decent slo mo shots...

hope all that helps!


ps, how do you like your bolex (sorry for the off topic question)?

Mark,
Go to post #6 in this thread, where Boyd Ostroff corrects my oversimplification of Frame Mode with a Panasonic link that compares frame mode to true progressive in great detail.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=56153&highlight=gl2+frame+mode

What it boils down to is that you get 480 lines of resolution with true progressive, 360 lines with 60i and 320 lines with frame mode. That 40 lines isn't much of a price to pay for for many viewers, used to NTSC broadcasts at 330 lines anyway.

And the subject becomes so deep when deterministic factors mix with probablistic factors (e.g. random pixel straddling of some image edges), and objective factors mix with subjective ones, that there are some experts who will say that even with DVD played on regular TVs you get only about 340 lines.

Anyway, if I interpreted the article at the above link correctly, I don't think that there is any way to deinterlace in post that won't cost just as much in terms of resolution as frame mode.


This is quite annoying. Does anyone know why Canon specifies that the television system in the GL2 is an "EIA standard (525 lines, 60 fields) NTSC color signal" when there is no way to get this resolution out of the camera?

According to the NTSC standard, there are 525 total lines, of which about 486 are usable for video data after retrace, vsync, etc are accounted for.

Why can't I get a 486 line signal out of the GL2? It sure seems like false advertising when the best you can actually expect is in the low to mid 300's.