Post Reply 
Blu-ray vs DVD *56k Warning*
Author Message
Assassinator
...

Posts: 6,646.6190
Threads: 176
Joined: 24th Apr 2007
Reputation: 8.53695
E-Pigs: 140.8363
Offline
Post: #7
RE: Blu-ray vs DVD *56k Warning*
Kuu Wrote:^ Too technical for me @_@

All I did was download the 1080p and 480p trailers from Apple and Yahoo, opened with Adobe Premiere, HDV 24p

General
Editing mode: MainConcept MPEG Pro
Timebase: 23.976 fps

Video Settings
Frame size: 1440h 1080v (1.333)
Frame rate: 23.976 frames/second
Pixel Aspect Ratio: HD Anamorphic 1080 (1.333)
Fields: No Fields (Progressive Scan)

Audio Settings
Sample rate: 48000 samples/second

Capture Format
MainConcept MPEG Pro

Video Rendering
Maximum Bit Depth: Off
Preview File Format: MainConcept MPEG Video
Compressor: MainConcept MPEG Video
Color depth: Millions of colors

Default Sequence
Total video tracks: 3
Master track type: Stereo
Mono tracks: 0
Stereo tracks: 3
5.1 tracks: 0
Submix mono tracks: 0
Submix stereo tracks: 0
Submix 5.1 tracks: 0



Then I frame capped it, exported as .tif. Opened it in Photoshop and Saved As .PNG.

I see.

As for what I was talking about, well, if you look closely at the image, for example the place I circled, you can see slight horizontal line artifacts (combing artifacts). That's caused by bad de-interlacing (converting 1080i to 1080p) not removing all the interlacing. If you don't remember deinterlacing it yourself, then premier probably auto-deinterlaced it for you?

[Image: maxpaynecompare1080pce5.png]

EDIT:
Kuu Wrote:Video Settings
Frame size: 1440h 1080v (1.333)
Frame rate: 23.976 frames/second
Pixel Aspect Ratio: HD Anamorphic 1080 (1.333)
Fields: No Fields (Progressive Scan)

Lolwut..?

It says it's fieldless (progressive)... Does that mean the source came like that? If so then shame on Apple/Yahoo/Whatever you got the source from.

Ok, look at the source directly. if it has lots of lines across it like this [Image: Weaving.jpg]
then it's interlaced (1080i). If it's clean, then it's progressive.



Kuu Wrote:This is what Premiere says it is:

Type: QuickTime Movie
File Size: 153.9 MB
Image Size: 1920 x 800
Pixel Depth: 1920
Frame Rate: 23.976
Source Audio Format: 44100 Hz - 16 bit - Stereo
Project Audio Format: 48000 Hz - 32 bit floating point - Stereo
Total Duration: 00:02:22:01
Average Data Rate: 1.1 MB / second
Pixel Aspect Ratio: 1.0

This is the second part of what I was talking about previously. The correct frame size for that picture should be 1920x1080, rather than 1440x1080. And after you crop top and bottom it becomes 1920x800, which is the correct aspect ratio for the movie. But that's not important for comparison purposes (is only important if you're going to encode it), so I'll shut up about it.
(This post was last modified: 04/02/2009 08:14 AM by Assassinator.)
04/02/2009 02:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
Blu-ray vs DVD *56k Warning* - Kuu - 03/02/2009, 09:42 PM
RE: Blu-ray vs DVD *56k Warning* - Mickey - 03/02/2009, 09:55 PM
RE: Blu-ray vs DVD *56k Warning* - Kuu - 03/02/2009, 11:43 PM
RE: Blu-ray vs DVD *56k Warning* - Assassinator - 04/02/2009 02:17 AM
RE: Blu-ray vs DVD *56k Warning* - Mickey - 04/02/2009, 08:01 AM
RE: Blu-ray vs DVD *56k Warning* - S7* - 04/02/2009, 09:33 AM
RE: Blu-ray vs DVD *56k Warning* - S7* - 06/02/2009, 01:00 PM

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)

 Quick Theme: