moire/aliasing from xavc-s to h264-blu ray

[Liverpool TV]

Hi Ron.

I don't think Andreas was saying that Edius was the only NLE to do direct to Blu-Ray from the timeline. I think he was referring to the fact that you can't export unless you are in the right interlaced project setup.

I could see the sense in Andreas' suggestion of going straight to media regardless of frame structure, at least for the single process of progressive to interlaced.

Although for my own way of working, I prefer the way Edius does things now. I personally do HQ/HQX masters at any completed stage of a workflow, then manipulate that master for other uses. I do understand that this is not how some like to work, but for me personally a more traditional workflow makes things easier and less prone to mistakes. Again, on a personal level. I think Edius does too much as it stands, I would much prefer a solid NLE that was perfect at editing, as opposed to something that maybe is trying to be everything to everyone and not quite getting some of it right.

On the subject of scaling. Maybe other NLE's use the same scaling algorithm as Edius, I don't know. But all my 4 and 5k tests in Edius, going to 1080, look brilliant and to my eyes better than FCP. I would imagine that if a 4k progressive to 1080 progressive down scale is looking wrong in Edius, this is more likely to be a user issue.

I take it there are no scaling issues with the layouter, as in odd increments compared to even?

[Zorro]

Good software for fps conversion cost 20x (or more) the cost of Edius and this is just for the conversion.

What's your weapon of choice?

[Ron Evans]

Hi Ron.

I don't think Andreas was saying that Edius was the only NLE to do direct to Blu-Ray from the timeline. I think he was referring to the fact that you can't export unless you are in the right interlaced project setup.

I could see the sense in Andreas' suggestion of going straight to media regardless of frame structure, at least for the single process of progressive to interlaced.

I am NOT pushing Vegas but of course Vegas can do what Andreas wants in changing progressive to interlace and rendering to a different frame rate interlace or progressive. There are some specific instructions for some conversions like 24P to 25P ( effectively time shift the audio to match frame rate maintaining frequency response ) . May not be very good but it can do it !!!

I do not use Premiere but since the encoding is sent to Media encoder I expect it also can do what is needed.

Most of my projects are still 60i since the NX5U cannot shoot 1920x1080 progressive but I run all the other cameras ( CX700, NX30U and AX1 ) in 60P.

I export a HQX file and encode in TMPGenc most of the time anyway.

Ron Evans

[Liverpool TV]

I export a HQX file and encode in TMPGenc most of the time anyway.

Ron Evans

I think that this type of workflow is best, although I don't use TMPEGenc. Even re importing masters back into Edius and letting it do certain processing, is just as good as anything else.

Going back to the original question. Those screen captures are showing issues on the computer's playback monitor, and not the output. This can be caused by a number of things, including the graphic card not being set properly to the native resolution of the monitor, and would also look different if played full screen.

Posting a native clip would make it easier for others to help.

[Liverpool TV]

If you need to provide masters at different fps, than shot at as high as possible fps. 120fps is great, but bit unrealistic, so in most cases 60p is good choice. Try to stay away from interlaced formats ( assuming you can get at least 50p). If choice is between eg. 29.97p and 59.94i than use 59.94i as this can be deinterlaced to 59.94p, which gives you much better start for fps conversions than 29.97p

Could you explain how shooting 120 helps with regard to framerate conversion. Who shoots at 120 to be able to extract to other frame rates? Can you show anything at all that uses that workflow.

Your suggestion of shooting at 60 is also as equally puzzling. This is not even a recognised format, let alone one that directly lends itself to be converted to other formats, without either speed issues or blending.

Depending on what rates you want to go to and from. There is simply no benefit between over or under shooting, if there is a fundamental difference in the time base anyway.

It's all very simple math, and some numbers simply won't go into others, hence why you still see artifacts even with Alchemist.

The simple reality is this. You should always shoot for your target. If you live in PAL land then shoot for that, if you live in NTSC land then shoot for that and if you live in film land then shoot for that. Edius will produce for any of these. Then if you want to change your master to something else, you will just have to accept what the rest of the industry has to with regard to frame rate manipulation, and that is. It is a real headache with no simple or magical one button solution, and for the best part you will always encounter issues such as geometry distortion, cropping, speed changes, frame blending, frame doubling, field doubling etc. etc.

[Liverpool TV]

Sorry, ment 59.94p.

There is a HUGE dependency between source fps and ease of fps conversion.
It's simply related to motion gaps. The more you have frames ( eg per second) the easier to interpolate between them.
If you want to do fps conversion by simply choosing existing frames than you dont need motion adaptive part of it at all☺ This is linear conversion, which can be done even in Edius. Also if your revelations were correct than we would already have reliable converters for 24<->25p and Snell would not need to spent years trying to deliver such a solution.
Keep in mind that in Alchemist's 60i to 50i conversion you almost won't find original frames (except some at scene chnages and some others). Probably 80% of them will be made up by Alchemist.
I can give you email to head of development at Snell, maybe he can convince you. I've worked on probably 300 masters which went through Alchemist 50i-> 60i conversion and done a lot of reporting to Snell about problems. I know enough in this subject to take your statements with huge distance.

You still never answered my questions. I also know enough about this subject to see that you have deleted what you originally said, because you know it was wrong. What you are saying about Snell and Alchemist is only repeating what I have already said, and that is, there is no magic button and these things are not simple. You obviously did not read my post properly, as I never made any claim to doing 25-24 conversion in any reliable way, Infact, I was saying the total opposite.

Your whole claim to shooting at 120 to deliver multi-standard must be something recent in the world of cinematography that I missed. Any chance you can point me to an industry recognised workflow that shows this in action, preferably something with a recognised commercial output. I really wouldn't want to be behind the times.

Or, maybe was your first claim a mistake?

[Jerry]

http://www.studiodaily.com/2012/12/w...-hfr-shooting/

[Zorro]

Anyone ever tried a Teranex 2D/3D?

[Geoff_C]

Would it be worth using a 1280x720 50p timeline which I believe to be BD standard. It might just clear the moire/aliasing problem and provide a temporary solution.

[GrassValley_PS]

We have noticed an ever increasing trend toward getting off topic and speculating about many theories on why this does that. We need to remember that if you need to discuss along those lines, do it in the Lounge.

Stay on topic, answer the OP's question and then move it. It is becoming increasingly difficult to glean the wheat from the chaff. We will start becoming more strict and delete OT posts.

[Liverpool TV]

We have noticed an ever increasing trend toward getting off topic and speculating about many theories on why this does that. We need to remember that if you need to discuss along those lines, do it in the Lounge.

Stay on topic, answer the OP's question and then move it. It is becoming increasingly difficult to glean the wheat from the chaff. We will start becoming more strict and delete OT posts.

Yes Pat, you are absolutely correct.

Maybe if the OP could post some native clips then other Edius users could help with the issue. Me personally, I find that Edius deals with the format way better than most NLE's. I would also go as far as to say that Edius is the most suited NLE for XAVC S productions, and probably more so when producing lower end resolutions from 4K.

In my experience it's usually down to the lack of understanding of formats and their technologies, as opposed to anything that Edius is doing. It's all well and good investing into "newer" formats such as 4K or UHD. But if an editor does not understand certain fundamentals of editing and video/film, then it is always an easy mistake to misinterpret the functionality of an NLE, in this case Edius.

[egarenc]

Put your UHD files into 50i project, make sure files are interpreted as progressive (assuming they are shot at 25p), choose lanczos3 scaling. If you have aliasing on exported BD disc, than add antiflicker filter. The best way is to have some HDMI/SDI monitoring to TV, so you can adjust strength untill aliasing is gone. Your final HD file is simply to sharp and because it may travel (depending on player/TV) throuh 50i chain during viewing it can't have as much high frequencies as real 25p chain could.
[/QUOTE]

thank's,
The antiflicker filter is THE solution.
I loaded again the Edius project (50i) with XAVC-S clips(25p).
I applied the antiflicker filter (100% to test)
It works, the trouble is fixed. I do not see visible decrease of the image quality.