On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 11:11:15 +0200, Pierre Marc Dumuid
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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..
Well, it might be logical, after all (see below)
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).
I forgot about the temporal difference. For zoom and pan it will look
wrong. Especially if you track something moving at constant speed with
camera automation you will likely get horrible judder.
However, I don't feel fields to frames is the ultimate workaround.
If the compositing pipeline saw 50 half-frames per second, then it
would be the compositor's job to merge the half-frames during playback.
That would be the very last step before display. Ideally, you should
have the altering fields at 50 Hz, with flicker and all.
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!
De-interlacing is lossy.
--
Herman Robak
_______________________________________________
Cinelerra mailing list
[email protected]
https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
