On 07/07/2015 11:23 PM, Filippov Alexey wrote: > I agree that a common way to avoid dealing with interlaced formats is to > use a deinterlacer before encoding. The main disadvantage of this > approach is blurring caused by applying a low-pass filter (deinterlacer) > to an interlaced picture. So, it's necessary to show that deinterlacing > before encoding is better than using specific tools inside the codec. If > anyone has counterarguments, I'd like to hear them.
Any blurring caused by the deinterlacer will also happen if the video is encoded interlaced, it will just happen on the decoder side instead. I agree that we should test this. We also need a way to compare the quality of the two methods. Here is my suggested test: original video -> deinterlacer original video -> x265 -> deinterlacer original video -> deinterlacer -> x265 All three will result in progressive output that can be compared with standard metrics. _______________________________________________ video-codec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec
