Hi everyone! Been ages since I've posted here. Hope all are surviving the Bad Times one way or another.

I have been keeping myself busy with archiving, digitizing and organizing all types of my old media...audio cassettes, photos and videos. One issue I'm having with the last is how to best capture standard def 60i footage for archiving. If one captures as a straight 60i file, the interlacing artifacts look pretty rough in a progressive display environment such as a computer. If one de-interlaces, the result is a 29.97p file but it changes the cadence of the footage from 60 images per second to 30, which gives a faux film-look and I'd rather retain the classic 60i look.

Now, I know the arguments: 60i IS 30p, for all intents and purposes (so tempted to write "for all intensive purposes" just to be annoying, but can't bring myself to do it). Yes, the two field collapse into a single frame just fine. But it doesn't have the correct cadence.

The way I've been dealing with it is to run it through JES Deinterlacer, that hoary old piece of shareware that somehow is still working out after all these years, which frame doubles to 60p and interpolates the missing info to turn each field into a frame. It works pretty damn well, all things considered. Remember this is largely home video footage I'm working with, so it's not super precise material But, it is a software process so it takes time. What I'm trying to figure it is whether there is a realtime hardware solution that can do the same thing?

I tried using my Decimator MD-HX to do a realtime conversion from 60i to 60p, and the result appears to be that it combines the fields into frames, then repeats each frame to fill out the 60p. Which means it is effectively the same visually as a 30p file, which doesn't help.

Anyone know of a solution that won't break the bank?

And here is the second part of my quest: I'd like to capture real time into H264. I'm using an Atomos Samurai Blade for my initial captures, which was their last generation that did standard def, but H264 isn't an option. ProResLT is fine for the stuff I really care about, but I have many tapes that I'd like to archive but not take up so much storage space. I can do the conversion to H264 in Resolve, but just like the deinterlacing, it's another process that takes time and resources and I'd love to do realtime. I've been trying to do it using a Teradek Cube I already owned that has an H264 record feature, but I have yet to find a reliable result with it, it is quirky.

I know there are a lot of pretty cheap H264 recorders designed for the surveillance market however I feel like those will introduce more artifacts and be less reliable than I'd hope for. Need something that can produce a high quality result similar to processing through Resolve but in real time.

One product I was looking at was the Datavideo HDR1. If anyone has notes on that, would be great.

Do you have a 60i clip that you know well that you can judge a result from? I guess you do. Can you upload a clip where you definitely see a difference in cadence and let some of us try converting it and re-uploading it for your evaluation? The reason I'm suggesting this is that for the last twenty years or so I have been working on a lot of documentary archive material that has come in every shape, size, frame rate and format you can imagine. All of which had to be brought into a progressive 21st century. Always prepared for a challenge to find suitable workflows. I guess 15-20 seconds should give us a reasonable crack at it.

Chris Young
Sydney

If one captures as a straight 60i file, the interlacing artifacts look pretty rough in a progressive display environment such as a computer. If one de-interlaces, the result is a 29.97p file but it changes the cadence of the footage from 60 images per second to 30, which gives a faux film-look and I'd rather retain the classic 60i look.

Ah, the archivists' dilemma. This is, perhaps, the essence of trying to hold onto old source material without holding onto all the equipment that was used to create it and view it. Because once you've "rescued" the source, it never looks the same on modern equipment. Sigh...

But surely this has already been "best practiced" by some group or other -- there's a heck of a lot of old programming on TV, especially on OTA subchannels. This is the same thing you're asking about -- old interlaced source being seen by people on progressive HDTVs. For example, there's one channel in my area called "Grit TV" which is all about old westerns. About half their programming is old B&W TV stuff. It's possible it's a scan of the original film, but I doubt it all is. Some of it is bound to be video tape. Anyway, that's where I'd start looking for a solution, because it would seem that someone already has a reasonable one.

Christopher Young, good suggestion and I will put up a test clip when I get the chance.

Bruce Watson, good point. The reason I haven't looked that route is because a few years back I directed a presentation pilot that took place in a newsroom, and I wanted the simulated on-air footage to have the live 60i look and the behind-the-scenes footage at 24p to differentiate it. We've seen this for years...my reference was the Larry Sanders Show. However, this was pretty easy when the delivery format was 60i, you'd just do the 3:2 pulldown with the film footage to convert to 60. I learned during Key & Peele that this gets to be a problem if you have a 24p or 29.97p deliverable, because you can't push more than 30 frames into that cadence.

My thought with the piece I was making was that since it would live on Vimeo or Youtube, both sites accommodated 60p clips so I would post everything to that timeline. The trick was converting the 60i footage (from broadcast cameras) to 60p and keeping the original cadence (dropping it on the timeline converted it to 30p with duplicated frames).

I went to a post house I have worked with that has some very sophisticated processing gear that was designed in-house because I thought they could just run it through for me. Turned out, they couldn't...but the engineer fought me tooth and nail on what I was trying to achieve (again, the old "60i is 30p, there's no difference" argument). Ultimately I ran a test using JES Deinterlacer and realized it would work, so I went that route. Hilariously, when I sent the test to that engineer to point out to him that it was indeed possible, his response was predictably defensive as he tried to pretend he didn't get that was what I was looking for. Sigh...

Here's that clip (there are several pieces of 60i originated footage in there, most obviously at 3:07):

Anchors Away on Vimeo

Yeah, I'm sure there must have been some 60i in there.

My goodness that was well written and very funny! Tell me they didn't all crack up whilst filming it. That piece was so entertaining to watch.

Andrew

My goodness that was well written and very funny! Tell me they didn't all crack up whilst filming it. That piece was so entertaining to watch.

Oh nice, thank you Andrew! It was a challenging day, lots to get through, can't remember too much cracking up between takes from my perspective at least! Continuity from studio to control room, plus coordinating all of the screens...lots of moving parts. Plus trying to get our "celeb" cameos in and out quickly.

I have used TMPGenc Mastering Works 7 that will deinterlace to double frame rate, 60i to 60P maintaining cadence/temporal motion. One can choose method and I have used "interpolate high precision" that seems to work reasonably. I am not a fan of slow frame rates so always shoot 60P now.

Interesting, Ron. Looks like Windows only though, yes?

Yes I think I am Windows based.

One issue I'm having with the last is how to best capture standard def 60i footage for archiving. If one captures as a straight 60i file, the interlacing artifacts look pretty rough in a progressive display environment such as a computer. If one de-interlaces, the result is a 29.97p file but it changes the cadence of the footage from 60 images per second to 30, which gives a faux film-look and I'd rather retain the classic 60i look.

Download these two files and compare them. One is NTSC DV 29.97 and the other is the same file De-interlaced and converted to 59.94 and it maintains the cadence of the original 29.97 DV file. Well, I believe it does. Have a look and see what you think. This particular DV file shows very high-speed movement which when transcoded correctly can still deliver a 60i cadence feel. The resulting MP4 is also less than 10% of the size of the original DV AVI file. I've made these files downloadable so as to avoid web transcoding issues such as can happen with YT and Vimeo.

Original DV interlace file:
https://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/q63m0k

De-interlaced DV file with a tiny amount of NR as it is such a high-speed video image.
https://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/jivmxv

Anyone any feedback?

Chris Young

That NTSC DV 29.97 clip doesn't look interlaced to me Chris. Theres no movement between the fields. Looks like it was recorded in 'progressive segmented frame' (29.97 PsF) format with 2-2 pull-down - what Panasonic called 'Frame Mode' and Sony called 'Progressive Scan' i.e 29.97 progressive frames signalled (‘wrapped’) as 59.94i, so on playback each frame gets duplicated.

All you are doing by 'double-rate' deinterlacing is creating imperfect (interpolated) duplicate frames. It doesn't need deinterlacing. If you want to keep the original 2-2 pull-down cadence you would treat the clip as progressive and apply 'hard 2-2 pull-down' (i.e. duplicate each 'progressive' frame), which is what most, if not all, editors do (by default) to convert 29.97p footage on a 59.94p project timeline; I can’t see any other reason for wanting to do so.

I have used TMPGenc Mastering Works 7 that will deinterlace to double frame rate, 60i to 60P maintaining cadence/temporal motion. One can choose method and I have used "interpolate high precision" that seems to work reasonably.

The deinterlacer in Mastering Works 7 is pretty good, but it is Windows only. I've always used AVISynth/VaporSynth deinterlace filters (QTGMC for highest quality). VapourSynth can be set-up on MacOS but it's more convoluted. I recall the RE:Vision Effects 'Field Kit' plugin (FCP included) was highly regarded back in the day, but I've no experience with it.

As for hardware deinterlacing - well there's BMD's Teranex AV. Again, no experience with it myself, but I've read where some have had issues with deinterlace results:

https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=84285

It was indeed interlaced, Bryan.

Yes agreed QTGMC is the best basically but even on Windows it's not the most friendly way of doing the transcoding. Basically the same quality I can get from QTGMC can be attained by using a different workflow in a much quicker simpler workflow.

Here are grabs of Media Info's details of two files. The first being the info from the original XDCam 4.2.2 1080i footage and the second being the info from the subsequent DV interlaced file that that was transcoded from the original XDCam. That being the DV file I uploaded. If you want to be convinced and see more upload a DV interlaced, or any interlaced file for that matter of about 10-30 seconds and I will process it for you. Old saying. Seeing is believing :)

Chris Young

I'm not convinced Chris. Yes, it is signaled as 'interlaced' scan type, but I see no motion between the separated fields.

Care to upload a short sample of the original XDCAM footage ?

Hi

Another example for you Bryan. This time fairly quick moving sport. Aussie Rugby League.

This is AVCHD 1080i 50 at its very low bit rate of 24Mbps. Converted to 1080p 50. Though at a higher bit rate than the original AVCHD as for this kind of sport to maintain the best compromise between size and quality I find I need to bump up the bit rate. You can see the encoding parameters used on the MP4 file, red box. The 50 frame look-ahead it what really helps on the motion estimation.

These files get delivered to the referees, coaches, managers, and the National Judiciary Panel for judgment of game code violations.

The 50i file can be downloaded here:
https://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/nzi8sf

and the 50p file here:
https://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/wg9mey

So far everybody feels it looks like the 50i from a motion cadence point of view so I'm are happy with the result.

Chris Young

The 50i file can be downloaded here:
https://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/nzi8sf


Yes, that's standard interlaced (50i) footage with continuous motion between the separated fields (Top Field First).

But the DV sample you posted was not. What can I say ? Again, I'd like to examine a short sample of the original XDCAM footage.

May I ask a side question? Us Brits have a list of US terms that initially confuse, but they're quite old and mostly understood. Pants, hood, trunk etc, but this topic introduces me to a new one - cadence. Here it's exclusively a sound term, so I'm trying to find the correct meaning. Is it a current US term for that strange shudders, jittery we get from mangling interlaced to progressive? Or is it just a general term used for something specific. I genuinely expected it to be something to do with mismatched audio sampling rates. Finding it to be about image quality has confused me greatly. I've never ever heard the term used outside audio before, so want to be able to use it corr city in conversation.

Paul the term cadence is used in the old country with regards to RPM in cycling. As well as in music and film. Having been a keen cyclist over there it was a term used quite frequently with regard to "pedal power." In these Covid enchanted times, I still try to maintain a cadence of 90-95 (RPM) on the stationary cycle. The older I get I find the phrase "Use it or lose it" is developing greater significance.

https://blog.wahoofitness.com/cycling-cadence-what-is-it-how-to-improve-yours/

I think what you were referring to is the cadence in music which has the famous four of 1. The Authentic Cadence, 2. The Plagal Cadence, 3. The Half Cadence and 4. The Deceptive Cadence. A very different meaning to cadence in the cycling term.

There again we now have the term cadence as used with reference to film and video. Have a look at segment 2.3 of the Alchemist manual for an understanding of cadence in the video/film domain. Quite different again to the previous two examples.

https://www.grassvalley.com/docs//Application_Notes/media_conversion/alchemist_file/Alchemist_File_Understanding_Cadence.pdf

Sorry Bryan I can't supply any of the original XDCam material as I don't have the right to do so but I shall check it's origin now that you have pointed out your findings. I didn't give it a thought as the material was supplied in the XDCam interlace format. The latter footy example is definitely 100% interlace I know as I shot that game in 1080i.

Chris Young
Sydney

Sorry Bryan I can't supply any of the original XDCam material as I don't have the right to do so...


That's a shame. Could you maybe upload a sample of the XDCAM HD422 1080i footage 'double rate deinterlaced' to 59.94p and encoded to x264 - as you did with the DV and 'Footy' AVCHD clips ?

...Basically the same quality I can get from QTGMC can be attained by using a different workflow in a much quicker simpler workflow.


What deinterlace workflow do you use, by the way ?

Edit:

Incidentally, here's the 'Footy' AVCHD clip deinterlaced with QTGMC (default settings) to 50p and encoded to x264 (CRF=18)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rGVNFQPLMkxsJnlTnFn9rkOpmd8YeFL5/view?usp=sharing

Your deinterlace workflow does a good job at eliminating residual interlace artifacts, but QTGMC recovers more detail:

https://imgur.com/qZ5ZB2e

After opening link, click on (+) cursor to enlarge image

Both do good, but I definitely see more detail in the grass in the QTGMC version.

Andrew

It was the players name (Petersham) on the back the white shirt that stood out for me in that frame - the letters are better defined in the QTGMC version.

Looking at the Mediainfo the QTGMC data rate is 25% more than Chris' data rate that should make quite a difference at these low rates. 20.8 for the QTGMC and 16.8 for Chris. I will make versions with TMPGENC at these two rates and post latter.

For added info the set up in TMPGenc MW7 is just a matter of selection on three sequential pages and then my Threadripper took 33sec to encode. So just over 1 min total time.

Got done quicker than I thought.But I think I messed up settings. Have to go out for an hour and will reset.

Looking at the Mediainfo the QTGMC data rate is 25% more than Chris' data rate that should make quite a difference at these low rates. 20.8 for the QTGMC and 16.8 for Chris.

Fair enough. I encoded the QTGMC x264 mp4 file in 'Constant Quality' mode at CRF=18. I see Chris encoded at CRF=20. I'll try replicating his encode settings for fair comparison.

I do not often post links so hope this works. The first time I messed up. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1aX9PqBvBt4gUPOCS05crHdZVuam1G-AJ?usp=sharing

Paul the term cadence is used in the old country with regards to RPM in cycling. As well as in music and film. Having been a keen cyclist over there it was a term used quite frequently with regard to "pedal power." In these Covid enchanted times, I still try to maintain a cadence of 90-95 (RPM) on the stationary cycle. The older I get I find the phrase "Use it or lose it" is developing greater significance.

https://blog.wahoofitness.com/cycling-cadence-what-is-it-how-to-improve-yours/

I think what you were referring to is the cadence in music which has the famous four of 1. The Authentic Cadence, 2. The Plagal Cadence, 3. The Half Cadence and 4. The Deceptive Cadence. A very different meaning to cadence in the cycling term.

There again we now have the term cadence as used with reference to film and video. Have a look at segment 2.3 of the Alchemist manual for an understanding of cadence in the video/film domain. Quite different again to the previous two examples.


Chris Young
Sydney

Interesting stuff - it does appear that the common theme in all these cadence examples is material with gaps - the cycling, the video the audio and British Telecom refer to the different dialling and ringing tones in different countries as cadence too. Just a new one on me - I suspect here we're lumping judder, jitter, and all those interlacing issues into the category of video cadence, which for me, is a totally new term.

To me the film cadence in an NTSC interlaced feed means that some frames are repeated in the 2:3 pull down sequence. It is a way of placing 24 progressive frames into a 59.94 field sequence. So to my eyes it judders because of those repeating frames. A bit like pedalling a bike and the right legs goes down twice before the left leg comes around !!

Fair enough. I encoded the QTGMC x264 mp4 file in 'Constant Quality' mode at CRF=18. I see Chris encoded at CRF=20. I'll try replicating his encode settings for fair comparison.

I'm not sure what x264 front-end/profile Chris used - I use MeGUI and encoding the AVISynth QTGMC deinterlace output to x264 at CRF=20, I get much lower bitrates - 14.3Mbps at CRF=20 with default settings (i.e. Medium preset).

Anyhow, here's a side by side comparison of Chris's, Ron's and my results:

https://imgur.com/BYjh3Tp

As before, after opening the link, click on the (+) cursor to enlarge the image.

Hi Bryan

I use a variety of front ends if you mean encoder packages. I am in total agreement with you that QTGMC is I think without a doubt the best deinterlacer I have used especially for detail and that includes many quite pricy software deinterlacers from some of the bigger software names.

For the sports files the encodes have to turn around very quickly. Common example, maybe half a dozen 80-minute games back to back during the course of day where at the end of each game the team coaches and officials are hanging around like a bad smell waiting for their MP4 files on USB sticks. As soon as the first half of a game is finished we are encoding that first half of the game during the ten-minute break. As soon as the game is over the encoding of the second half of the game starts and needs to be finished or close to being finished by the time the coaches, officials, etc get up to the camera deck.

Therein lies the problem with QTGMC. It is slow even on a fast machine compared to some of the other deinterlace scripts around. Like in some cases four times as slow with motion intensive footage like sports.

Agreed for my own encodes I will use QTGMC. The quickest neatest way I have found to use QTGMC is in the German software from Selur. They make a free encoder app that comes standard with QTGMC/AVISynth as part of its internal scripts. Much easier to teach people to use that than trying to educate novice encoders through the ffmeg, virtual dub, MeGUI, AviSynth type routes. Nothing wrong with those applications methods but far too involved involved for this type of work where a simpler quicker Yadif encode will suffice.

Below is a similar frame from the footy using QTGMC in 'very fast' mode using "Hybrid" which is the software from Selur.
Their website is:

Welcome to the home of Hybrid | Hybrid (http://www.selur.de/)

The Hybrid encode config with "x264 preset veryfast"

"x264 --preset veryfast --pass 1 --bitrate 20000 --profile high --level 4.2 --direct auto --b-adapt 0 --sync-lookahead 18 --qcomp 0.5 --rc-lookahead 40 --qpmax 81 --aq-mode 0 --sar 1:1 --qpfile GENERATED_QP_FILE --non-deterministic --range tv --stats "C:\Users\cyvideo\AppData\Local\Temp\Hybrid QTGMC Interlace 01.stats" --demuxer raw --input-res 1920x1080 --input-csp i420 --input-range tv --input-depth 8 --fps 50/1 --output-depth 8 --output NUL -

x264 --preset veryfast --pass 2 --bitrate 20000 --profile high --level 4.2 --ref 3 --direct auto --b-adapt 0 --sync-lookahead 18 --qcomp 0.5 --rc-lookahead 40 --qpmax 81 --partitions i4x4,p8x8,b8x8 --no-fast-pskip --subme 5 --aq-mode 0 --vbv-maxrate 62500 --vbv-bufsize 78125 --sar 1:1 --qpfile GENERATED_QP_FILE --non-deterministic --range tv --colormatrix bt709 --stats "C:\Users\cyvideo\AppData\Local\Temp\Hybrid QTGMC Interlace 01.stats" --demuxer raw --input-res 1920x1080 --input-csp i420 --input-range tv --input-depth 8 --fps 50/1 --output-depth 8 --output "C:\Users\cyvideo\AppData\Local\Temp\Hybrid QTGMC Interlace 01.264" -"

The QTGMC de-interlaced clip out of Hybrid is here:

https://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/4l1xhs

Chris Young

Hi Bryan good comparison. Not being too picky but both yours and Chris frame appears to be a frame after those of mine. Interesting that Chris's and mine do not look too different while the QTGMC appears to have more contrast, something I can alter in the TmPGenc encode too but have not really played with optimizing. I have uploaded another encode with just a little sharpening filter on the encode, same drive folder. This is not something I do so have not played with all the available filters so have no idea how much I could improve the encode. Encode time was now 40 seconds.

Hi Bryan good comparison. Not being too picky but both yours and Chris frame appears to be a frame after those of mine.

Yes, you're right. Now corrected.

For the sports files the encodes have to turn around very quickly. Common example, maybe half a dozen 80-minute games back to back during the course of day where at the end of each game the team coaches and officials are hanging around like a bad smell waiting for their MP4 files on USB sticks. As soon as the first half of a game is finished we are encoding that first half of the game during the ten-minute break. As soon as the game is over the encoding of the second half of the game starts and needs to be finished or close to being finished by the time the coaches, officials, etc get up to the camera deck.

Therein lies the problem with QTGMC. It is slow even on a fast machine compared to some of the other deinterlace scripts around. Like in some cases four times as slow with motion intensive footage like sports.

Agreed for my own encodes I will use QTGMC. The quickest neatest way I have found to use QTGMC is in the German software from Selur. They make a free encoder app that comes standard with QTGMC/AVISynth as part of its internal scripts. Much easier to teach people to use that than trying to educate novice encoders through the ffmeg, virtual dub, MeGUI, AviSynth type routes. Nothing wrong with those applications methods but far too involved involved for this type of work where a simpler quicker Yadif encode will suffice.

So basically you need real-time deinterlace. I agree Yadif is probably the best/most convenient software deinterlacer for that case. Actually QTGMC uses Yadif as the core intra-field interpolator for the 'Ultra Fast' preset. Have you tried using QTGMC with multi-threading ?


Below is a similar frame from the footy using QTGMC in 'very fast' mode using "Hybrid" which is the software from Selur.
Their website is:

Welcome to the home of Hybrid | Hybrid (http://www.selur.de/).

Yes, I'm familiar with Hybrid. I like MeGUI though - it auto-updates all of the required packages and has some accessory tools that I find very useful e.g. AVS Script Creator, Muxers. Plus I have all of my custom encode profiles to hand. So I see no reason to change.


The Hybrid encode config with "x264 preset veryfast"

"x264 --preset veryfast --pass 1 --bitrate 20000 --profile high --level 4.2 --direct auto --b-adapt 0 --sync-lookahead 18 --qcomp 0.5 --rc-lookahead 40 --qpmax 81 --aq-mode 0 --sar 1:1 --qpfile GENERATED_QP_FILE --non-deterministic --range tv --stats "C:\Users\cyvideo\AppData\Local\Temp\Hybrid QTGMC Interlace 01.stats" --demuxer raw --input-res 1920x1080 --input-csp i420 --input-range tv --input-depth 8 --fps 50/1 --output-depth 8 --output NUL -

x264 --preset veryfast --pass 2 --bitrate 20000 --profile high --level 4.2 --ref 3 --direct auto --b-adapt 0 --sync-lookahead 18 --qcomp 0.5 --rc-lookahead 40 --qpmax 81 --partitions i4x4,p8x8,b8x8 --no-fast-pskip --subme 5 --aq-mode 0 --vbv-maxrate 62500 --vbv-bufsize 78125 --sar 1:1 --qpfile GENERATED_QP_FILE --non-deterministic --range tv --colormatrix bt709 --stats "C:\Users\cyvideo\AppData\Local\Temp\Hybrid QTGMC Interlace 01.stats" --demuxer raw --input-res 1920x1080 --input-csp i420 --input-range tv --input-depth 8 --fps 50/1 --output-depth 8 --output "C:\Users\cyvideo\AppData\Local\Temp\Hybrid QTGMC Interlace 01.264" -"


That's a two-pass encode profile though, targeting 20,000kbps bitrate. The first 50p x264 file you posted for the 'Footy' clip was encoded in (single pass) 'Constant Quality' mode at CRF=20.

Actually QTGMC uses Yadif as the core intra-field interpolator for the 'Ultra Fast' preset.

Direct comparison of Yadif, QTGMC "Ultra Fast" and QTGMC "Slower"(default) which uses NNEDI3 as the intra-field interpolator. I used one AVS script to process the three in parallel, crop and stack the outputs and grab the composite output frame in VirtualDub. So it's free from the influence of x264 encoding variables:

https://imgur.com/GsiZTYj

Unfortunately I can't test the Video Mastering Works 7 deinterlacer myself. I ran the 30 day trial version a good while back, and they 'remembered'.

Edit: Also, for anyone interested, here's a 'one-stop-shop' for setting up VapourSynth (and thereby QTGMC) and Hybrid on MacOS:

https://forum.selur.net/showthread.php?tid=1279

As stated in the FAQ though "Starting from 2018, Hybrid is no more updated for macOS, but seems it still works well on macOS (Mojave)10.14.6"

Yadif is also available in Handbrake and FFMPEG for which there are MacOS versions.

DaVinci Resolve has a deinterlace function ( licensed Studio version only) but it's 'single field' only and not that great.

Don't know if any of this is helpful to you Charles ?

That's a two-pass encode profile though, targeting 20,000kbps bitrate. The first 50p x264 file you posted for the 'Footy' clip was encoded in (single pass) 'Constant Quality' mode at CRF=20.

Correct sir. That is what I usually use for quick encodes where speed not ultimate quality is the prime objective. The Hybrid QTGMC upload is yes the dual-pass setting that I would normally use for quality encodes though slower.

Yes I love that MeGUI updates its components on the fly. More than happy to use it. With the footy very often students are used "as encoders." Many are keen to earn some extra money on the weekends. A lot of them do not have a clue about video per se so sometimes I teach them to use Avidemux as that is literally a three-click operation for people that have no idea what 'encoding' is. As you would be aware Avidemux is available for both Mac and PC.

https://mac.filehorse.com/download-avidemux/

No I haven't tried QTGMC with multi-threading but now that you have mentioned it I will give it a run.

The other thing I do like with Hybrid is the fact that I can throw Sony's XDCAM broadcast 50Mbps, 422, 50i 'MXF files at it. I haven't yet found any other deinterlace app capable of taking these broadcast MXF wrapped files. Not that I have tried extensively once I found that Hybrid could handle them.

Stay safe!

Chris Young

With the footy very often students are used "as encoders." Many are keen to earn some extra money on the weekends.

That's very enterprising of you.


The other thing I do like with Hybrid is the fact that I can throw Sony's XDCAM broadcast 50Mbps, 422, 50i 'MXF files at it. I haven't yet found any other deinterlace app capable of taking these broadcast MXF wrapped files. Not that I have tried extensively once I found that Hybrid could handle them.

VirtualDub2 will import these files:

VirtualDub2 (http://virtualdub2.com/)

Has an internal Yadif deinterlace filter and integrated x264 (8bit and 10-bit) encoder also.


Stay safe!


And you.

Thanks Bryan. Will have a look.

Chris Young