Help! Videos not looking sharp.

[Trevor Andrew]

Hi Ken

The screen shop provided is of a converted video file not the original.
I asked the question earlier and Mcleod was going to provide a screen shot of the original recording.

[mcleod13]

I have attached the original properties of the file. When I download the video to my computer, I connect it via the USB port and use the software provided for the camera PMB. Then I add the file to VS X4.

[mcleod13]

This is a sample video that shows the problem. If anyone can help me I would greatly appreciate it.

[Ken Berry]

When I look at your sample video above, I am afraid I cannot see any 'squiggle' through the centre of it, even in the fast panning parts. It may be that my eyes are not that good, though I don't think so. And for the record, I watched it three times in the 360p format you posted, but also once in YouTube in 360p and twice in YouTube expanded to its 720p and full screen on my 1920 x 1080p monitor.

What I *do* see, however, is the blurriness associated with the panning being way too fast. This also occurs with standard definition video, but gets increased with high definition interleaved (i) video such as yours. It is not as bad if the HD video is progressive (p). You appear in any case to have take interleaved 1440 x 1080 AVCHD and converted it to progressive 1280 x 720, which would have also degraded the overall quality slightly.

But the basic lesson applies to all HD video: keep panning shots verrrrry slow and keep the range of the pan short. If you watch professional HD documentaries, for example, you will see both of these practices in effect.

[mcleod13]

I don't know why.. I can see it, especially in the first few seconds of the video. However, it appears towards the top 1/4 of the video. I wish I completely understood what you meant by converting it to progressive. Any suggestions on what to read so i can understand it more?

[Ken Berry]

I just watched it again on YouTube itself, 720p full screen 1920 x 1080 24 inch. And I can still only see the 'shimmer' effect of over-fast panning.

And in effect, the only way to make fully progressive video is to have a camcorder which films in progressive mode -- which is one which shoots with the various frame speeds shown with a 'p' instead of an 'i' after them. Your camera shoots in interleaved ('i') format. You could edit it and process its video as Frame Based instead of its native Upper Field First, and it would come out as 29.97p. But I suspect you would still have the shimmer simply because your panning is way too fast even for full progressive video. But you could try and see.

And a brief, simplistic explanation of p and i is that progressive camcorders film each frame as a solid picture -- everything there -- 1080 horizontal lines in every frame so very high quality. Interleaved video, which is what we've all been used to in the past, was developed with old cathode ray TVs in mind. Each frame is broken into two field: and Upper Field and a Lower Field. If you think of a 1920 x 1080 frame, then the Upper Field contains 540 horizontal lines and the Lower Field the other 540 forty. These are broadcast sequentially but with alternating lines: with Upper Field First, lines 1, 3, 5, 7 etc are broadcast first very quickly followed by lines 2, 4, 6, 8 etc. And the speed is so high that the human eye interleaves the two sets of lines and sees them as one. But subliminally there will always be a microscopic shimmer as the lines alternate. And the more lines (which is what HD video is all about), the more shimmer -- even though microscopic. Add to that a horizontal pan which is too fast, and the shimmer becomes so great it is almost painful for the eye to watch it and try to make something out of it.

[Trevor Andrew]

Hi

I see the quality as reasonably good, but there is a definite horizontal breakup of the video. There is not so much as a shimmer but as though the pixels were separating across a horizontal band.

Only noticeable as you pan left and right ( ever thought of using a tripod)

I can see the first as you pan left to the man then another as you pan right back to the door.

I believe Ken is correct in his explanation of the Interlaced v Progressive issue.

Why did you convert the video to 1280 x 720.?

[mcleod13]

LOL.. I wish I could say that I mean to convert it. Then I would know what to NOT do. I honestly don't remember converting except when I selected the upload option in VS X4. I would normally use a tripod, however this was when I first bought the camera and didn't have one on me. Also, when I do my paranormal investigating, I carry this camera with me.

[Ken Berry]

Even with a tripod, though, you have to avoid fast panning in HD. I have a floating head tripod which allows you to adjust the panning speed, and is incredibly smooth. But I still observe the basic rules of keeping it slow and keeping the panning distance relatively short...

And I am wondering whether what I describe as 'shimmer' is what Trevor sees as a possible disaggregation of pixels. That would be the perceived effect of trying to interpolate too many (HD) pixels in the Upper and Lower Fields when the movement is too quick and the eye perceives a sometimes painful blur.

The panning shimmer or blur effect is well known and much discussed a simple Google search using "high definition panning blur [or shimmer]" will bear that out.

[mcleod13]

Oh, I'll try to keep it slow from now on... I didn't realize that it would be so bad to do so. This is my first ever HD camcorder so I will have to learn how to properly use it. I would like to start making a lot of movies and videos. I am, what you would call, ADDICTED.

[Kingston]

I downloaded the 360 FLV, the 360 MP4, and the 720P MP4 and played each back on my computer with Splash Pro. Notwithstanding the fast panning problem, there's nothing wrong with the videos. There's nothing unusual going on in the first part of the video or upper 1/4th of it.

When I play the video with the player on this web page, there are all kinds of problems. So it's not the video. It's the player, computer, and internet that are at fault.

[Trevor Andrew]

Hi

Can I assume you chose Share Upload to Web - You Tube
This will convert your video to the settings you originally posted.

The original video is M2ts, try uploading this to You Tube
Do not use Video Studio, but log-in to your account to upload.

Now compare the two.
---------------------------------------
I also downloaded the video and can identify additional frames, however these may have been added during my upload and not part of the original.
I also see a small shimmering band running vertically to the far right of the frame

Mcleod
Your 1280 x 720 sample shows 90.067 seconds, now the Youtube is 53 seconds.
Does that mean that the properties are not the actual Youtube uploaded file?
Has the file been converted again?

And I think most of us on the forum are addicted to video

[mcleod13]

Thanks everyone! I appreciate all the advice. I will upload the file when I get back home today.. It will take a while but it's worth it.

Kingston, Thanks! I will make sure to slow down when panning.

Trevor, the file is shorter because the original file had a few seconds of video with my wife working in the yard, and her hair was a mess. She sort of threatened me if I were to put it up on youtube. So, after further deliberation, I felt it was in my best interest to cut that part out.

[Ken Berry]

She sort of threatened me if I were to put it up on youtube.

Yes -- that could have caused a squiggle down *your* middle...!!!

[mcleod13]

HAHAHAHAHAH!! No kidding!