DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Canon XL and GL Series DV Camcorders (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xl-gl-series-dv-camcorders/)
-   -   24p questions (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xl-gl-series-dv-camcorders/34265-24p-questions.html)

Jeremy Harrington December 1st, 2005 12:33 PM

Strange Jagged Edges
 
I just bought a brand new XL2. After playing around with it for the last week or so, I notice that things seem to have Jagged edges, esepcially in 24P/16:9.

I can focus fine and when I focus up, i can see Jagged edges on some of the things in the shot. Is there soemthing im not doing, or is this some sort of defect.

Ash Greyson December 1st, 2005 03:16 PM

Post a pic or video and we can tell you exactly what is going on. The limitation, not only of DV, but all digital video is that the sharpness can create jagged edges, particularly on a backlit subject. There are a number of ways to overcome this, you can adjust the coring, the vertical detail, etc. etc. etc.


ash =o)

Jeremy Harrington December 2nd, 2005 07:08 PM

i understand
 
I will upload a picture with what I am talking about. Some objects in the shot seem to have jagged cuts take out of the sides/edges. Sometimes outside when shooting there will be white streams across buildings/houses. Ill upload a picture to better describe

Eric Brown December 2nd, 2005 08:32 PM

I'm assuming this is a "moire" issue but as the other poster said, guess the pictures will tell.
If it is this, I had the same issue which turned out to be a non-issue after some adjusting and viewing of the footage on a proper monitor.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...931#post292931

Jeremy Harrington December 3rd, 2005 05:28 PM

pictures
 
http://www.putfile.com/jerma985

there are 2 pictures there. The first one looks ok there, but in the premiere timeline it did not look like that. It's more evident in the second photo. I was trying to show how the divets in the walls have a flicker. in any brick or wall with indents, i get this brain numbing flicker in the divets where there are no bricks.

Also, I have extreme amounts of noise in my footage. Almost like I have a bad TV signal when watching my stuff back. I have tried adjusting the coring, sharpness, everything. I just cant seem to avoid having my stuff look like a "bad TV signal" I would upload some raw footage but it is over 200 mb.

Keep in mind this is all with Gain at 0+db and proper white balancing.

Eric Brown December 3rd, 2005 11:23 PM

I do believe a lot of it has to do with viewing the footage on a progressive monitor vs an interalced monitor(I think I said that right, if not someone correct me... please).
My XL2 footage displays these type of artifacts as well at times when editing in either Final Cut or iMovie. It's not in the footage, it's in the playback as far as my situation goes because I don't see it at all on my JVC field monitor.
Try to hook it up to a regular TV monitor and have a look. Assuming there isn't anything REALLY wrong with your machine (let's hope not) you'll see the difference.
Anytime there are repeated patterns, i.e. grillwork. stripes on shirts, bricks, etc.. moire will exist.
Here are settings I use 90% of the time for my camera.

24p
16:9
1/48th shutter
gain - 0+
wb - tungsten
3x Canon wide angle
gamma - cine
knee - low
black - press
color matrix -cine
color gain - 6+
color phase - normal
rgb gains - normal
v detail - low
sharpness - -4
coring - 6+
set up level - -5
master pedal - -4
NR - high

With these settings I have not experienced any heavy aliasing that I'm aware of. Below is a link to some grabs I've recently posted. They are fuzzy due to just being poor screen grabs, but as you can see there is no extreme aliasing at all on the subject matter.
Do the TV thing or get a good monitor. It's more than likely your XL2 is just fine.

http://www.indiefilmer.com/nuke/modu...iewtopic&t=100

Ash Greyson December 4th, 2005 02:51 AM

I agree, watch your raw footage back thru the camera hooked to a TV and see how it looks... what was your shutter setting?


ash =o)

Jeremy Harrington December 4th, 2005 11:18 AM

shutter
 
i was in 24p, 16:9, shutter 1/48, 0 gain

Phil Rogerson December 5th, 2005 05:43 AM

similar problem solved...
 
...hey Jeremy, I posed a similar question a few days back, and had some useful advice, but none that solved my problem. I found the answer by trial and error after thinking my camera was useless! My real problem was I didn't understand enough about the Progressive format. That was compounded by the fact that FCP's Help doesn't seem to talk about 25p and field dominance settings.

Here's what my problem was: I'd set the 'field dominance' at lower as I'm working with a PAL system, but that was the problem! When working with PAL footage shot at 25p the field dominance MUST BE SET AT NONE!! At least, that's how it works for me.

I've spent countless hours reading past discussions on this forum about 'moire' effects, aliaising and anti aliasing, custom settings; and trying every conceivable permutation of the camera's custom settings. I was ready to get rid of the camera and go for HD... then I discovered the problem.

Now all the footage I shot, even with Sharpness and Vertical Resolution set to high, has almost no sign of the problems that so annoyed me. I say 'almost no sign' because there is one distant corrugated iron roof that has the slightest degree of aliasing if I look real hard. No one else will ever notice.

I really hope that solves your problem too. I'm editing in FCP, and the field dominance is in 'Sequence Settings'. Good luck. -- phil.

Greg Boston December 5th, 2005 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Rogerson
Here's what my problem was: I'd set the 'field dominance' at lower as I'm working with a PAL system, but that was the problem! When working with PAL footage shot at 25p the field dominance MUST BE SET AT NONE!! At least, that's how it works for me.

Yes, that's what progressive is. There is NO interlace. Therefore, there aren't any 'fields' just whole frames. Glad you got it figured out so you can enjoy your camera for the great camera it is.

regards,

-gb-

Jeremy Harrington December 5th, 2005 11:45 AM

ntsc
 
I am in an NTSC system with PP1.5, anyone know where to do this?

Ash Greyson December 5th, 2005 03:12 PM

In the project settings, you can choose, lower/higher/none.... choose none...



ash =o)

Ash Greyson December 5th, 2005 03:15 PM

Are you guys shooting 24PA and editing in a 24P timeline? There is MASS confusion over the different frame rates. Most the time I see problems are with people trying to do 24PA in a 60i timeline. I personally dont see any point at all in editing in a 24P timeline unless you are delivering for film out. There is much argument over it but I prefer to shoot 24P with 2:3 pulldown and edit in 60i... I never have these moire or aliasing issues...



ash =o)

Phil Rogerson December 5th, 2005 04:06 PM

25p
 
Ash -- The footage that caused me grief was PAL shot at 25p on the XL2, then captured in FCP with the 'DV PAL 48 kHz anamorphic' sequence preset.

I assumed that selecting that preset option would not require further adjustments to sequence settings, but of course I assumed incorrectly.

When I made a DVD from the FCP edited material, it showed much rippling across corrugated roofing, cladding, airconditioner grills etc, and stepping/aliasing on fence wires, hipped roof houses, and objects with sharp edges against contrasting backgrounds; the same rippling as showed on my PowerBook screen when editing (even after rendering with the canvas at full screen and playback resoultion high).

I'm not using an external monitor for shooting, and only the 15" PowerBook screen for viewing editing, but all the deformities I saw when the sequence was set to 'lower field dominance' were reproduced on the DVD.

I've yet to compress the new sequences to DVD, but am confident I'll see better results, because what I'm seeing in the Quicktime movie of the sequence is a so much better.

Jeremy Harrington December 5th, 2005 04:46 PM

still a lil confused
 
alright, so if I want to edit my 24p footage correctly in pp1.5 I should put the fields to No feilds (Progressive Scan) ?

what about the timebase? should I keep that at 29.97?

and what about the drop frame thing? I am a newbie with 24p so sorry if this is an easy question

Phil Rogerson December 5th, 2005 05:00 PM

Jeremy -- My only experience is with FCP editing, and 25p, so my help may not be relevant... but I had major problems when my sequence settings didn't match my camera settings, ie Field Dominance for 25p capture should have been set to 'none'.

Timeline, I'd say try and see. Set up two projects, one for each setting you wish to try, then place the problem causing clips in each project and compare results.

I recommend setting the time line with the same settings you shot at.

Ash Greyson December 6th, 2005 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy Harrington
alright, so if I want to edit my 24p footage correctly in pp1.5 I should put the fields to No feilds (Progressive Scan) ?

what about the timebase? should I keep that at 29.97?

and what about the drop frame thing? I am a newbie with 24p so sorry if this is an easy question



How was your footage shot? Was it in 2:3 or 2:3:3:2 ??? The former should be editing in a 60i 29.97 timeline with lower field first, the later in a 24P, 24FPS timeline, with NO fields. In theory, anything should work in any timeline but there will be conversions and that can introduce the problems many people see. Also, the standard built in de-interlacer for Premiere is not very good...




ash =o)

Phil Rogerson December 6th, 2005 02:44 AM

Looks good before exported
 
Jeremy -- I may not have the solution to the problem at all! The edited footage looks clear of aliasing when I enlarge the 'canvas' (Final Cut's view of the timeline) and play in full screen in 16:9, but when I export the footage, it's just like before, full of the wriggles and aliasing. I export with identical settings to the sequence ('use current settings'), but the movie is squashed to 4:3 and awful.

There's not a ready-made preset for the 25p timeline, nor one for 25p sequence settings in FCP, and though I've customised till exhausted, I can't get the exported version to mirror the clarity of the sequence played in FCP's timeline; the editing is just one clip without need for rendering.

So... I'm off to search the editing forums for settings for progressive editing.

Ash... any ideas. I realise you're using NTSC, but maybe?

I shot in 16:9, 25p PAL, at 1/50sec. Strange thing is, when I use the pre-set 'DV PAL 48 kHz', with 'lower field dominance' the clip exports as a 16:9 format movie, but with prominent aliasing.

I guess I'd better ask further questions in an edit forum.

Miguel Lombana December 6th, 2005 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy Harrington
alright, so if I want to edit my 24p footage correctly in pp1.5 I should put the fields to No feilds (Progressive Scan) ?

what about the timebase? should I keep that at 29.97?

and what about the drop frame thing? I am a newbie with 24p so sorry if this is an easy question

Have you tried starting your project using the Panasonic 24p preset? I believe that is what it was setup for. I don't shoot 24p, only 30p (don't like the sluggishness of 24p) but when I did some testing when I first got the cam, that was the preset that I used.

ml

Jeremy Harrington December 6th, 2005 12:15 PM

Where is it
 
Where is the panasonic 24p preset?

Ash Greyson December 8th, 2005 01:32 AM

Not sure Phil... are you exporting to tape or are your digital files showing this?


ash =o)

Phil Rogerson December 8th, 2005 03:58 AM

Exporting to Quicktime movie, then burnt to DVD
 
Ash... The images I wrote of where exported as a Quicktime movie from FCP 4.5.

I discovered that I could improve the DVD resolution using a Quicktime conversion with 2 pass VBR, and tweaking the bit rate settings; and even better by exporting the sequence from FCP using Compressor, and converting to MPEG-2 using 60 minute High Quality Widescreen.

Most of the aliasing has gone, but I notice there still lingers some artifacting on some pans, but I note they are on the original and there's no chance of that changing.

I know now that some issues definitely exist with PAL 25p at 50 fps on shots where the camera moves anything more than super slowly, but I've not completely exhausted all test scenarios, like dropping the coring. I'll do that just as soon as it stops raining!

One thing I've learnt: some of the aliasing that shows in the EVF, like a thin line that off-vertical, does not show in the captured footage when viewed in FCP's canvas at full screen, and that's interesting.

Steve Smith December 8th, 2005 08:11 AM

you might want to try
http://www.wrigleyvideo.com/forum/index.php

for specific PPro 1.5 setting questions.

Phil Rogerson December 10th, 2005 07:37 PM

25p to 50i in camera
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Boston
Yes, that's what progressive is. There is NO interlace. Therefore, there aren't any 'fields' just whole frames. Glad you got it figured out so you can enjoy your camera for the great camera it is.
regards,
-gb-

Greg: I'm not entirely convinced that what you say is the case with PAL processing, at least not according to the PAL XL2 manual. On page 42 it reads, "25p Mode. Records 25 fps progressive mode and outputs signals converted into 50 fps interlaced." There is an accompanying diagram showing individual frames labelled A,B, etc, then below, another diagram labelled 'Tape'. That diagram shows each of those single frames have been split into two fields: aa, bb, etc.

Assuming this diagram correctly represents the process from camera to tape, and that the word 'interlaced' is used correctly by Canon, the information 'Captured' from tape into FCP will be interlaced.

If that is indeed true, should not the 'field dominance' setting in FCP be as for interlaced PAL, 'lower field dominant'? Or, is one of the 'aa, bb, etc' fields discarded on capture?

I realise you work with NTSC Greg, but you may be able to help dissolve my confusion.

Thanks for your comments -- phil.

Phil Rogerson December 11th, 2005 01:46 AM

24p timeline advantages
 
<<I personally dont see any point at all in editing in a 24P timeline unless you are delivering for film out. There is much argument over it but I prefer to shoot 24P with 2:3 pulldown and edit in 60i... I never have these moire or aliasing issues...

quote: Ash >>

Ash: There's an interesting article by Graeme Nattress here:

http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage..._nattress.html

In the third last paragraph of the article Graeme suggests that editing in a 24p timeline allows a higher quality DVD product than a 29.97 one because higher bit rates can be used, although I'd guess that's probably only an issue if you're getting close to maximum storage on the disc.

He also writes of faster rendering using a 24p timeline.

But I'm still interested to learn why you prefer to edit on a 60i timeline even when you've captured at 24p, aside from that you said you've not experienced moire/aliasing issues when editing that way.

Richard Hunter December 11th, 2005 06:50 PM

[QUOTE=Phil Rogerson]
If that is indeed true, should not the 'field dominance' setting in FCP be as for interlaced PAL, 'lower field dominant'? Or, is one of the 'aa, bb, etc' fields discarded on capture?

I realise you work with NTSC Greg, but you may be able to help dissolve my confusion.

QUOTE]

Hi Phil. The video is captured progressive, but is split into fields in order to be carried on the PAL interlaced video stream. Each field has different data (odd or even lines) that needs to be combined correctly by the NLE in order to recover each full frame.

If the NLE is set to lower field dominant, then any operation that requires full frame processing will cause the NLE to deinterlace the video and effectively discard half of the video data. If the NLE is aware that the video is progressive, it will process the full frame data correctly with no loss of vertical resolution.

Richard

Alexis Vazquez December 13th, 2005 09:02 PM

24p Stuttering issue
 
Any recomendation to avoid stuttering while shooting 24p mode. I don't use this mode too much and last atempt was a nightmare.
Thanks

Alexis

Eric Brown December 13th, 2005 09:13 PM

I believe there are a few threads on this already. But, tell us what exactly you are attempting to shoot? Is it a fast action sequence with quick pans?
The strobing is inherent to 24p. What may be useful, if this is indeed the case, is to set the shutter speed higher at around 1/1200? or so to better capture fast action.

A. J. deLange December 14th, 2005 06:11 AM

Recomendation: don't use 24p. 24p is to be used (1) when one is transferring to film and (2) when one wishes to simulate the stutter of film.

Alexis Vazquez December 14th, 2005 07:39 AM

Hi , this won't be for film transfer, just video to DVD. I used 24p just to give it a try and see the video with a more film taste. I was shooting some sport scenes: Karate, Swiming, Jogging. Not much pans but a lot of fast actions like kicking and all that karate things. I knew about the film alike stutter but this was way too much. I don't remember the settings I used but in some ocassions it looks awsome maybe in automatic mode) , so I thought it was more a setting issue. I search yesterday without any luck, today I did found some but more about the pulldown thing and for film transfering wich I'm not planning to do.

Georg Liigand December 14th, 2005 09:30 AM

If you're doing a normal project with no intention to transfer it to film later on, then keep recording in normal interlaced mode. That's the best for motion.

Kevin Kocak December 14th, 2005 09:34 AM

You might have a little better luck with 30p

Alexis Vazquez December 14th, 2005 09:56 AM

Thanks to all for the info.

Mike Teutsch December 14th, 2005 10:19 AM

Alexis,

If you read the manual, it does recommend 30p for sports.

Good Luck---Mike

Ash Greyson December 15th, 2005 02:23 AM

30P is GREAT for sports, you can also kick up the shutter for crystal clear action. That being said, I just shot a bunch of horses in 24P (not 24PA) and it looked great. The thing about 24p is that it will really expose any fault in shooting, framing, moving, etc. You have to be a very experienced operator for 24P to look good in some situations.



ash =o)

Giuseppe Palumbo December 24th, 2005 03:16 AM

Thought 24p wasnt interlaced?
 
Well, i shot my first music video last night with the XL-2. I opened a new 29.97 Video project in vegas and began capturing. I noticed that the video was/looked interlaced. I'm use to the frame recording of the GL2 so im not sure what the deal is. Am i supposed to capture another way or Is it all the same. Also, i know this isnt really the right forum but what if i export to 24fps in Vegas 6. Will the footage look any different.

Justine Haupt December 24th, 2005 03:17 PM

I'm not familiar with Vegas 6, but in v5 it has to be set to capture 24fps. You have to check "custom frame rate" and pick "24.000 (film)" from the dropdown in options > preferences > capture tab from the video capture window. Hope that helps... I've never had a problem with it.

Giuseppe Palumbo December 24th, 2005 04:36 PM

So when filming in 24p, u have to capture in 24p? i didnt think it was like that though...

Ash Greyson December 25th, 2005 03:35 AM

It depends... what 24P mode were you in? 2:3 or 2:3:3:2? I usually just shoot in 2:3 and work in a 60i timeline. capturing is nothing special. If you shot in 2:3:3:3 then you need to capture it in 24P to remove the extra info. In that case you would want to edit in 24P as well. I suggest you shoot and work as I do... no learning curve, just the 24P look...


ash =o)

Giuseppe Palumbo December 25th, 2005 09:38 AM

I shot in the regular pulldown settin 2:3. And am using a normal 60i timeline and everything, i dunno though. i'll be posting frames from the shoot tomorrow though, so you can check em out and tell me what you think.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:14 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2021 The Digital Video Information Network