Getting "Lines" on video.

[Mostly_Harmless 0]

I just started flying with my PC109 (with a liquid 5 lens and a UV filter). When I got home today I captured a clip with windows movie maker. After saving it I went to view it and I am not really sure how to explain it but nothing looks very smooth. Everything looks like is has jagged edges. Did I set something up wrong?

_________________________________________
www.myspace.com/termvelocity

[PhreeZone 15]

What did you capture it with? USB or Firewire?

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Mostly_Harmless 0]

Firewire. I am going to go hook it up to my TV to see if I am getting it before I capture it.

_________________________________________
www.myspace.com/termvelocity

[jerry81 10]

Could it be just interlacing? Check the original of the two pictures- do the lines in your footage look anything like that?
I don't know how or if you can fix it in Windows Movie Maker, though. I only use it as a backup for capturing if Premiere's capture goes nuts on me.

---

[Mostly_Harmless 0]

Yup that's it! Picture 1. It doesn't seem to be as bad as that but that is what I am getting.

_________________________________________
www.myspace.com/termvelocity

[steveorino 7]

You should be able to 'deinterlace" and get rid of those lines with Adobe Photo Shop on captured stills. (I can with Corel Photo paint.) I don't know if Windows Movie Maker allows you to do that Adobe Premiere does.

steveOrino

[DSE 3]

First of all, you don't WANT to deinterlace if this will be showing on a regular television, and if you DO want it deinterlaced, certainly don't use Premiere Pro.
Use something made for it. For instance, frameservine from PP Pro to the Virtual Dub deinterlacer, or use the Canopus deinterlacer found in Procoder. It's very good.
Sony Vegas does a good job as well.
you need to determine how you want to deinterlace, for skydiving I'd recommend bob/weave, but you could also blend fields with some motion blur.
Sony Vegas does a good job of blending fields, but that's the only deinterlace method that does well in Vegas. Mike Crash' deinterlacer is very nice, and it's free. Alparysoft does a reasonable job, and there is a free demo of that app for Premiere Pro and other NLE systems. Dynapel has a GREAT deinterlacer that they quit making, but you can find free copies around the web if you look hard.
The reason you don't want to deinterlace just "anywhere" is that you'll lose half of your resolution if it's not done right. The Kell factor allows you to keep up to 35% of your resolution if you deinterlace correctly.

[mccordia 73]

Lots of people in here always asume people are aiming for high-end broadcast use of their footage.

Just using the simple built in deinterlacing options in premiere (or whatever package) work well enough for most people....especialy if you're encoding to a compressed websized version of your video anyways...

If you're encoding it for viewing on a PC or internet, just doing a simple rightclick>fields>always deinterlace, or deinterlacing of your footage in the encoding to mpg/divx/wmv/quicktime is more then enough.

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[Mostly_Harmless 0]

I have taken video off this camera before without this problem (using windows movie maker). I am going to try to use a different quality setting when I capture it again (I used the "Send back to the mini DV tape" option, next time I will try the best play back on computer opinion to see how it works.

_________________________________________
www.myspace.com/termvelocity

[mccordia 73]

the lines are not 'a problem'
They are part of the way interlaced DV video works..

But there is a chance that movie-maker captures your footage de-interlaced (just using 1 of the 2 fields) if you choose the 'playback on computer' option yes...

But if you're intending to use it in an edit for DVD or output to tape again later, then its recomendable to keep the fields(lines) for sharper/smoother video playback on tv.

Do a search on google for "Video interlacing" to find out excactly what their function is.

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[DSE 3]

Quote

Lots of people in here always asume people are aiming for high-end broadcast use of their footage.


reply]

All encoders, high end or not, do their best job with the highest resolution input available. Why throw away half the resolution when the cost of keeping it is identical? Yes, I understand that web or highly compressed is often a target delivery, but does that mean it's "OK" to deliver less quality when you don't have to?
I guess I don't quite get your point since I live in the world of "best it can be for the cost." It costs nothing to keep most of that additional 50%. But, if you're happy with the 15 frames out of the 30 you shot... by all means, use it.

• Quote

[mccordia 73]

Quote

I guess I don't quite get your point since I live in the world of "best it can be for the cost."

I live in that same world...and time is also a factor in mine

Quote

It costs nothing to keep most of that additional 50%. But, if you're happy with the 15 frames out of the 30 you shot... by all means, use it.

You're not turning 30fps video into 15 fps video.(I know thats not what you mean, but in trying to make a point, you do make it seem that way)

Depending on what the video is for, I do use external progams that handle the deinterlacing. But for 99% of the non-broadcast stuff, I dont. And quality-wise, the video's look nice and sharp. Sure..they might look a few mere % better if you put in the extra effort, but to me, its not worth it.

Working within one editing program, saving a lot of time also means a lot to me. (And I shoot in PAL, so I get more image-lines to start with)

here and here are two recent vids deinterlaced with premiere, AND compressed afterward, and it still comes out looking good.

Why bother with the extra trouble of deinterlacing in an external program. And why make things 10 times more complex for someone who is just trying to understand what 'fields' are, and how to find a simple way to 'get rid of them'

When I see 'windows movie maker' as the editing program of choice, I dont think high end broadcast quality progressive scan footage is what he's aiming for..he just want to watch and edit his skydiving, and not be bothered by 25 different programs and a ton of settings

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[Mostly_Harmless 0]

That pretty much sums it up. My goals are to be able to save some clips on my computer (to send to friends/family) and once in a while make a DVD showing the highlights of some of the footage I have collected. I don't have the money to spend on Adobe Premier so I was thinking of picking up a program like Power Director (http://www.cyberlink.com/multi/products/main_4_ENU.html) to do the job. Is that a good/bad decision?

_________________________________________
www.myspace.com/termvelocity

[mccordia 73]

I dont know the program you specified, but there is a whole range of nice simple editing programs.
Do a search on this forum, and you'll probably find quite a few (Pinacle studio etc.) and some reviews of sayd programs..

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[Mostly_Harmless 0]

Thanks mccordia

_________________________________________
www.myspace.com/termvelocity

[DSE 3]

For the price of the Director software, you'd likely find yourself better served with Avid Studio (formerly Pinnacle Studio) Adobe Premiere Elements, or Sony Vegas Movie Studio. Of the three, I prefer Sony, but all of the above are standards. Sony has a better mpeg encoder than the other two; it's the same encoder they have in their high end software. It's kinda weak on the quicktime side, but for windows media and mpeg, it's terrific. VMS also has templates for PSP and iPod built in, and comes with DVD Architect, which is great for making very polished DVDs.
http://www.cyber-aspect.com/sreviews/vegas_studio.htm has a review.