Interlaced to Progressive vs Interlaced to Interlaced?

Moderator: Ken Berry

mitchell65
Posts: 1200
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:50 pm
operating_system: Windows 7 Home Premium
System_Drive: C
32bit or 64bit: 64 Bit
motherboard: Dell Inc. 04GJJT A00
processor: 2.80 gigahertz AMD Athlon II X4 630 Quad Core
ram: 4Gb
Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 4200
sound_card: Realtek High Definition Audio
Hard_Drive_Capacity: 560Gb Sata
Location: Cornwall UK

Post by mitchell65 »

skier-hughes wrote:Are you recording in 1920 JOhn?
As you have the cam, I'll leave Charade in your capable hands
No my Cam records as 1440 x 1080.
I'm lost on the interlacing problem so don't think I will be of much use to Charade. I can't even find where the interlace details are shown. :oops: Please keep on this one if you have time.
John Mitchell
We all make mistakes, that's why pencils have erasers on the end!
Charade
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:01 pm

Post by Charade »

mitchell65 wrote:
skier-hughes wrote:Are you recording in 1920 JOhn?
As you have the cam, I'll leave Charade in your capable hands
No my Cam records as 1440 x 1080.
I'm lost on the interlacing problem so don't think I will be of much use to Charade. I can't even find where the interlace details are shown. :oops: Please keep on this one if you have time.
There was a lot "debate" over the output from the HG10. The sensor is 1920x1080 but the files are 1440x1080 but retain the same aspect ratio as 1920x1080(something to do with the aspect ratio of the pixels themselves). What's interesting is when I bring the clip into X2, the preview window shows a 16x9 aspect but if I take a snapshot (to a .bmp image), the image is 1440x1080 with the aspect ratio similar to 4:3. The image is also "squished" in the horizontal dimension (tall and skinny people).
mitchell65
Posts: 1200
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:50 pm
operating_system: Windows 7 Home Premium
System_Drive: C
32bit or 64bit: 64 Bit
motherboard: Dell Inc. 04GJJT A00
processor: 2.80 gigahertz AMD Athlon II X4 630 Quad Core
ram: 4Gb
Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 4200
sound_card: Realtek High Definition Audio
Hard_Drive_Capacity: 560Gb Sata
Location: Cornwall UK

Post by mitchell65 »

Just checked this out. I get the self same thing. I took the BMP file into an image editer, resized to 1920 x 1080 and it shows perfectly in VS.
Odd but at least that is a workaround to this problem.
John Mitchell
We all make mistakes, that's why pencils have erasers on the end!
mitchell65
Posts: 1200
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:50 pm
operating_system: Windows 7 Home Premium
System_Drive: C
32bit or 64bit: 64 Bit
motherboard: Dell Inc. 04GJJT A00
processor: 2.80 gigahertz AMD Athlon II X4 630 Quad Core
ram: 4Gb
Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 4200
sound_card: Realtek High Definition Audio
Hard_Drive_Capacity: 560Gb Sata
Location: Cornwall UK

Post by mitchell65 »

Had another look at this one. This time I put the squished image into the Timeline of a new project, switched off "Perform non square pixel rendering" and the image in the preview screen stretched back across the window! I double checked this a couple of times. I then rechecked (switched on ) the render non square pixels then put a new raw MTS clip in the timeline. Saved a frame as as image, dragged that to the timeline and it showed correctly. Seems as if VS has "learnt" to do this, how very strange
Have just rebooted the PC and done the whole procedure again and it works perfectly. Now even saves the still image as 1920 x 1080.
Curiouser and curiouser as Alice would say :wink:
John Mitchell
We all make mistakes, that's why pencils have erasers on the end!
Charade
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:01 pm

Post by Charade »

Where did you switch off "Perform non square pixel rendering"? I've seen it in the output dialog box but not in a project preference box.
mitchell65
Posts: 1200
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:50 pm
operating_system: Windows 7 Home Premium
System_Drive: C
32bit or 64bit: 64 Bit
motherboard: Dell Inc. 04GJJT A00
processor: 2.80 gigahertz AMD Athlon II X4 630 Quad Core
ram: 4Gb
Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 4200
sound_card: Realtek High Definition Audio
Hard_Drive_Capacity: 560Gb Sata
Location: Cornwall UK

Post by mitchell65 »

Charade wrote:Where did you switch off "Perform non square pixel rendering"? I've seen it in the output dialog box but not in a project preference box.
Click Project Properties> Edit > Corel Video Stio Tag > Under TV standard is the "Perform non-square pixel rendering" checkbox
John Mitchell
We all make mistakes, that's why pencils have erasers on the end!
Charade
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:01 pm

Post by Charade »

Thanks. I unchecked that box and followed the steps in your previous post but the still image doesn't stretch to fill the preview window. If I add the video the still came from to the timeline and it's there along with the still, it shows stretched in the preview windows but the still remains "square". If I click between the two in the timeline, the preview changes between stretched and not stretched. As you say, curiouser...

Ah... there's a pulldown on the right side that says "aspect ratio" - "keep aspect ratio" or "fit to project to project size". The default for me was "keep" and when I changed it to "fit...", the preview of the still "stretched". This was with "non square" unchecked.

If you set "aspect ratio" to "fit" and turn "non square" back on, the aspect ratio in the preview changes again to something else!
Charade
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:01 pm

Post by Charade »

When I loaded my video clip into the project and made DVD MPG files switching between "non square" off and on, the output files appeared to be the same in Windows media player (Win 7). The project preferences were 16:9, which the output videos were, but the aspect ratio of the preview in X2 changed between squarish and widescreen.

I think this "non square" thing is confusing a few of the conversion programs I've been trying because a few of them have produced "squished" videos.
Post Reply