...
Would it be much harder to make it work with interpolated scaling, too?
Probably not.
A (VERY SHORT) sample comparison is available at:
http://cvs.cinelerra.org/~pmdumuid/interzoom/myzoom.mov
http://cvs.cinelerra.org/~pmdumuid/interzoom/origzoom.mov
A very obvious improvement, indeed. Any effect that affects the
image spatially (that would be blur and sharpen, too) should be
interlace-aware.
Yes!! but there's a LOT of work involved and currently most people
consider that the best means of combating interlacing is working at 50
fps.. Somehow this doesn't feel logical to me though..
Would it make sense to extend Cinelerra's core to present each
frame as two vertically stacked fields to the plugins?
That could do the trick. The other thing to be aware of is that zoom,
being a function of time should be different for each field. (which in
my case it wasn't).
The code that I sent was only a test-of-an idea, and was relatively
simple to implement. There are likely a number of ways of tacking this
issue, (also there's the possiblity of using a de-interlacer for each
set of fields using both fields.. LOTS of work to implement though!
_______________________________________________
Cinelerra mailing list
[email protected]
https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
