Anime Difficult to Deinterlace/Telecine?

y2kwizard · Post by **y2kwizard** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 12:49 am

Hello all. I'm just wondering if there is a certain series of anime that is historically more difficult to deinterlace/telecine than others? I've been having some trouble, recently, doing Ranma 1/2...tried all four methods given in the Guide, and I still had a little interlacing...it was better than the original, but still a tad noticeable.

So is Ranma an indication of how difficult all anime is to telecine/deinterlace? Or is it just a difficult anime to get rid of the interlacing lines? What are som eother historically difficult anime to deinterlace/telecine?

Thanks in advance!

Bushido Philosopher · Post by **Bushido Philosopher** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:11 am

well i dont know if there CAN be a history since interlacing is a standard problem on everything.

if you just have trouble with ranma and have already tried it on another series and got better results, then you must be doing something different.

deinterlacing cannot be "more difficult" since that's just how the way interlacing is. i'm sure you're just messing with your settings a bit.

trythil · Post by **trythil** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:16 am

The Evangelion TV series DVDs. The telecine on them is an incredible mess -- the only thing that you can really do is deinterlace.

Well, I haven't had luck with them, anyway. Maybe it's just me.

End of Evangelion is a lot easier, though. Not sure about Death & Rebirth.

ErMaC · Post by **ErMaC** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:38 am

The problem with Eva is that it wasn't actually telecined with 3:2 pulldown, so inverse 3:2 pulldown doesn't work. It's like trying to put back together pieces of a puzzle that were cut incorrectly.

The true torture test is the original Record of Lodoss War OVA DVDs from Image/CPM from 4 years back (NOT the remastered one, the one in the red box). The Lodoss OVA DVDs have the most horrible telecine anyone has ever found on a true-film anime (i.e. not a digital half-30fps one like Lain, although the telecine in that one on the non-digital parts is also daunting).

Decomb generally can deal with them properly now, however.

outlawed · Post by **outlawed** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 4:34 am

Why is it that everyone is so hung up on deinterlacing and IVTC in the pre-edit process of late...

Deinterlacing is an afterthough for me. My normal mode of output is the world of NTSC and as such I edit interlaced. Now I do toss my stuff out to float around the net and in those cases I will do 2 tests: deinterlace it and IVTC it with some manual adjustments. Mind you this is after I have edited field based NTSC footage. Both are inaccurate quality wise but the IVTC method can be painfully wrong in preserving field data into the frames obviously. However, considering the purposes these files suit I care not for some minor glitches that less than 1% of viewers may even be able to pick up on. If my IVTC process doesn't screw things up much I can utilize it and save on datarate to # of frames and thus improve quality. In some cases this is not feasible and I deinterlace.

I think more people should consider why they are trying to IVTC footage and consider whether they are working with a pristine source that was actually telecined accurately to begin with. Both are equally important. The first which is often overlooked depends on what your goals are and what you need to accomplish in terms of production (i.e. What is primarily your use? Analog or Digital). The second is important to understand because IVTC is only properly executed when the original source was telecined as a whole. Most anime available (barring recent releases in this discussion) were not telecined properly in a continuous manner but were rather telecined in piecemeal segments due to the cheap production nature of the industry. This results in a lot of problems when you IVTC.

It's not like I'm against IVTC'ing footage at all. I'm merely trying to bring a different point to this discussion. Based on what I see here and the talk of late, everyone seems to feel a need to use IVTC but may not have necessarily considered whether it is feasible enough or cost effective enough (personal time wise).

RadicalEd0 · Post by **RadicalEd0** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:01 pm

There's something horribly wrong with GTO's telecining

trythil · Post by **trythil** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:08 pm

outlawed wrote:Why is it that everyone is so hung up on deinterlacing and IVTC in the pre-edit process of late...

Deinterlacing is an afterthough for me. My normal mode of output is the world of NTSC and as such I edit interlaced.

You just answered your own question.

If you primarily do online distribution, you have every reason to make your video as suitable for viewing on a computer as you can. Pre-edit inverse telecining is another way of doing that. It also, in most cases, happens to be the best way of doing it.

There's nothing wrong with post-production deinterlacing or IVTC. They still work.

However, with regards to post-production IVTC...

Now I do toss my stuff out to float around the net and in those cases I will do 2 tests: deinterlace it and IVTC it with some manual adjustments. Mind you this is after I have edited field based NTSC footage.

Well, yeah. If you've done anything more than straight cuts, it can be impossible to recover the progressive video stream via post-production inverse telecine. Which is why a lot of people who aim for 'net distribution like to do it pre-edit. It's easier, and it works better.

The first which is often overlooked depends on what your goals are and what you need to accomplish in terms of production (i.e. What is primarily your use? Analog or Digital).

I think most people who produce video for both analog and digital devices understand the differences between them, and can adjust their projects accordingly. Maybe I'm wrong, though.

Anyway, you can export to multiple targets with minimal effort with the tools available these days. (Check out AVISynth and Decomb.) It's also much easier to telecine a progressive source than it is to inverse telecine a telecined source.

The second is important to understand because IVTC is only properly executed when the original source was telecined as a whole. Most anime available (barring recent releases in this discussion) were not telecined properly in a continuous manner but were rather telecined in piecemeal segments due to the cheap production nature of the industry.

Telecine can be messy and can change throughout the footage -- we know this, and there are now ways around it, in most cases. (Decomb is probably the most-used IVTC solution, precisely because it can deal with irregular telecine and changes in telecine pattern.)

Oh yeah, and this discussion is about anime that is difficult to IVTC.

I think more people should consider why they are trying to IVTC footage and consider whether they are working with a pristine source that was actually telecined accurately to begin with.

I'll agree -- the distinction between "interlaced" and "telecined" is one that I think still needs to be clarified. (This thread seems to prove that -- you can have difficult or impossible IVTC, but there's always an easy way to deinterlace...)

Org Profile · Post by **Vlad G Pohnert** » Wed Jan 01, 2003 4:42 am

Since I do the majority of my paid projects (yes, paid projects) for NTSC distribution, I edit with interlaced footage as well. My hardware card, Matrox RT2500 (as with the DV500) works in DV which is interlaced so why convert. I find continual conversion introduces errors to begin with and if you plan on showning it on a big screen at a con, why not work with interlaced footage and then de-interlace it for web distribution.

Yes, for web only stuff it make sence to get rid of the interlacing prior to editing. I just seen so many videos on the big screen that end up being quite jurky and part of the problems are too many conversions or weird frame rates.

Now, of course if you manipulate the speed of footage or plan to manipulate frames, then running through de-interlacing filters is a must. One thing I do though to maintain my video in real time DV when working on it is to use Premiere's de-interlacing to get the video pacing and feel the way I want it. Then I take the original clip and de-interlace it outside of premiere and re-render it for the final version....

I just wanted to point out the editing with interlaced footage IS NOT EVIL. The majority of video editors do it all the time out in the real world and considering the many AMVs are also created to be shown on an NTSC device, this factor has to be taken into account as well....

Yes, I realize the topic of this thread and to sum it up deinterlacing/IVTC is not written as an absolute must!

Vlad

Vlad