|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 31st, 2003, 05:08 PM | #1 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Kuwait, Kuwait
Posts: 100
|
is Frame Mode same as De-interlacing?
is Frame Mode in XL1s equivalent to Deinterlacing an interlaced video in NLE ?
|
August 31st, 2003, 08:26 PM | #2 |
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Boston, MA (travel frequently)
Posts: 837
|
Not quite.
Take a look at the following for a better understanding of "Frame Mode". http://adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-etc.html#filmlook - don
__________________
DONALD BERUBE - noisybrain. Productions, LLC Director Of Photography/ Producer/ Consultant http://noisybrain.com/donbio.html CREATE and NETWORK with http://www.bosfcpug.org and also http://fcpugnetwork.org |
August 31st, 2003, 11:46 PM | #3 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Kuwait, Kuwait
Posts: 100
|
ok, so I get it. but they make the "Frame mode" sound so great. so why not use it all the time? are there any disadvantages for it? or is it just a matter of taste?
|
September 1st, 2003, 12:58 AM | #5 |
Barry Wan Kenobi
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,863
|
You lose resolution, but not as much as using de-interlacing.
De-interlacing would result in a resolution loss of about 50%, whereas Frame Mode gives you a resolution loss of about 25%. The look is the same as de-interlacing (except with the better resolution). Why not use it all the time, you ask? If you like the look, go ahead -- that's what it's there for! The drawbacks are if you intend to transfer your footage to PAL (assuming you're NTSC already) or for making a feature to be transferred to film, or using something like Magic Bullet to create a 24P simulation -- in those circumstances Frame Mode is the wrong choice and will severely limit your flexibility. For NTSC television release, Frame Mode is perfectly acceptable, provided that it gives you the look you want. |
September 1st, 2003, 03:45 AM | #6 | |
Wrangler
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 1,933
|
Adam Wilt's explanation is a bit different from ones I've seen before, but makes the most sense as to why the effect isn't duplicable in post with a software algorithm.
Quote:
__________________
All the best, Robert K S Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | The best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors |
|
September 1st, 2003, 04:40 AM | #7 |
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Belgium
Posts: 804
|
Deinterlacing isn't all that bad...Right if one uses field doubling or field interplation there is a 50% vertical resolution loss. Modern motion adaptive deinterlacers are virtually lossless w.r.t. vertical resolution. All nowadays flatpannels, and non CRT projectors have (need) intelligent deinterlacers build in, an perform very well.
|
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|