Of course I got here a bit of rummaging in the forum for an answer to my question, but am not really become so clever. I'm just about to dub my old Hi8 videos to your computer, take this one Miro DC30 capture card. Which takes the material on interlaced. Now the question: should I deinterlace? The finished video should be on DVD (XviD codec) and then plays with a suitable player. Toward the deinterlacing speaks the fluid movement that is lost. The difference of 50fps and 25fps is clearly seen. At 25fps you can not speak of jerk, but butter is about different ... However, I noticed that the deinterlacing is synonymous benefits. I have often read that the picture is thus blurred. I can confirm all and not at all. On the contrary, it is sharper! I use a special filter for deinterlacing (for VirtualDub SmartInterlace or so he states), the fields really well composed, so razor sharp and produced a near-perfect frame. If I play from the video then with a DVD player on a VGA monitor, the picture looks sharper than the interlaced version. On a television so you can not see the difference. Another advantage is the lesser of the deinterlace space with the same quality. So I really do not know what to do. Everything has its pros and cons. How do you do it? I am really totally undecided and would like to hear some other opinions. Best regards, Benjamin
Antwort von Elefa:
One question: Why is assembled materials consumes less space?
Greeting Elefa
Antwort von Axel:
Hello, Benjamin. The pros and cons you've proven themselves perfectly. I would then decide: Is it longer videos, it is probably more likely that you see them s.Television on stand-alone player, because the fluid motions are interlaced better. Brief Cases of, say, under five minutes you might throw more times briefly in the calculator, and if you as the Picture is more important than the motion resolution, deinterlace. If the material is not very extensive, may fit both versions on the DVD, and you can offer to menu a choice.
Antwort von Markus:
Hello Benjamin,
Axel has already written the most important on the subject. Here are a few excerpts from the article 16:9 oder 4:3? (ja ja, wie sich manche Beiträge entwickeln können...):
"... the export parameters depend on how the material was recorded (interlaced or progressive) [...] and to which output devices (television, computer monitor) is scheduled to play.
Normally, a camcorder, the video image captures interlaced, ie 50 fields per second interlaced (which is synonymous names 50i). When will be your preferred output device of the television, then you export the picture as it was recorded by the camcorder, so probably interlaced. [...]
When used for future film output from the computer monitor (for example, if you want to make the movie as a file on the hard drive), then a progressive frame rate is advantageous. In this case, you have to deinterlace when exporting the material. "
Antwort von UF:
For deinterlacing you lose information. If the primary interlaced material will not increase the quality of deinterlacing, you're losing information. And satisfying adaptive deinterlacing, I have NEVER seen before.
If I want to have progressive-material, then I have to shoot progressive 24p/25p/30p/50p/60p say depending on what I want.
