short explanation: i believe your camcorder material is interlaced which is a good standard for display on tv screens. (i have a canon mv720i which delivers interlaced pal on mini dv.)
the characteristic comb-like artifacts typically occur when displayed on computer screens at normal frame rates, so that each single image is a composite of two half-frames taken at different points in time. hope this helps cheers georg On Wednesday, 2. April 2008 09:13:42 Norval Watson wrote: > Hi, > I am puzzled by interlacing. > > I loaded a miniDV clip from my cheap Samsung video camera and selected > Interlace mode - Not Interlaced > Then I rendered to raw DV, encoded with mencoder, and uploaded to Vimeo. > > Then I repeated the process and selected > Interlace mode - bottom fields first > > Then I repeated the process and selected > Interlace mode - top fields first > > You can see the tests at > http://vimeo.com/user417718/videos > > All the tests seem to have the same level of comb artefacts. > And there seems to be no variation in motion quality, ie. "jumpiness" or > "smoothness". > > The only difference I can see is that the test encoded at 3000 kbps is > slightly better than the 1800 kbps test. > > Am I missing something here? > Thanks, > Norv > > > > > > > > Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address. > www.yahoo7.com.au/y7mail > > > > _______________________________________________ > Cinelerra mailing list > [email protected] > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra -- dr. kurt georg hooss kurts film / schoepfung & wandel breite strasse 6-8, d-23617 luebeck kurts-film.de _______________________________________________ Cinelerra mailing list [email protected] https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
