AVISynth: AVI going from 29.97fps to 23.97fps using invers..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Hi,

I have an AVI file - 29.97fps. I'd like to convert it to 23.97fps to make
an NTSC film. I'd like to do it with AVISynth. Has anyone done it? What the
script should look like? Thanks.

--Leonid

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

> Hi,
>
> I have an AVI file - 29.97fps. I'd like to convert it to 23.97fps to make
> an NTSC film. I'd like to do it with AVISynth. Has anyone done it? What
the
> script should look like? Thanks.

Grab Donald Graft's excellent DeComb filter. It comes with instructions and
exact scrip examples, depending on your source material.
http://neuron2.net/index.html

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

McAllan <fghj@tyui.tyu> wrote:
: Grab Donald Graft's excellent DeComb filter. It comes with instructions and
: exact scrip examples, depending on your source material.
: http://neuron2.net/index.html

Thank you. By the way, I'm a bit confused. Do there exist NTSC Film DVD
specifications? I was going to open TMPGenc for NTSC Film template and didn't
find any. Only SVCD NTSC film and VCD NTSC film.

--Leonid

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

On 14 Nov 2004 19:20:58 GMT, Leonid Makarovsky <venom@cs.bu.edu> wrote:

>Thank you. By the way, I'm a bit confused. Do there exist NTSC Film DVD
>specifications? I was going to open TMPGenc for NTSC Film template and didn't
>find any. Only SVCD NTSC film and VCD NTSC film.

On the video tab:
- Change the frame rate to 23.976 fps.
- Change the encode mode to 3:2 pulldown.

You can see a picture of the correct settings in this thread:
http://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=239003

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

erratic <erratic@reply-to.address> wrote:
: On the video tab:
: - Change the frame rate to 23.976 fps.
: - Change the encode mode to 3:2 pulldown.

Got it. Actually the thing is, the LaserDisc video I captured from was NTSC,
but the source was film. I can clearly see 3:2 pulldown. Now I can use
inverse 3:2 pulldown to feed TMPGenc the the 23.976fps (internally 29.976fps)
or I can feed TMPGenc with original AVI (29.976fps) file and set it interlaced
for 29.976 interlaced NTSC. Which approach would be more accurate? And also
will the 1st approach save me the disc space?

--Leonid

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

On 14 Nov 2004 21:07:28 GMT, Leonid Makarovsky <venom@cs.bu.edu> wrote:

>Got it. Actually the thing is, the LaserDisc video I captured from was NTSC,
>but the source was film. I can clearly see 3:2 pulldown. Now I can use
>inverse 3:2 pulldown to feed TMPGenc the the 23.976fps (internally 29.976fps)
>or I can feed TMPGenc with original AVI (29.976fps) file and set it interlaced
>for 29.976 interlaced NTSC. Which approach would be more accurate? And also
>will the 1st approach save me the disc space?

I'm not really familiar with inverse 3:2 pulldown, but if it's done
properly it should be better than keeping the film interlaced, because
after IVTC the encoder only has to encode 23.976 non-interlaced frames
per second instead of 29.97 frames (some interlaced). Progressive frames
are easier for an encoder. There are fewer frames to encode, so each
frame gets more bits if you use the same bitrate; or you can lower the
bitrate without losing quality. (Obviously you will only save disc space
if you lower the bitrate.)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

> Got it. Actually the thing is, the LaserDisc video I captured from was
NTSC,
> but the source was film. I can clearly see 3:2 pulldown. Now I can use
> inverse 3:2 pulldown to feed TMPGenc the the 23.976fps (internally
29.976fps)
> or I can feed TMPGenc with original AVI (29.976fps) file and set it
interlaced
> for 29.976 interlaced NTSC. Which approach would be more accurate? And
also
> will the 1st approach save me the disc space?

For best results, use AVIsynth to perform the IVTC and get you the 23.976
progressive video. Feed that into TMPGenc and encode with the DVD (film)
template like Erratic explained. The only correction I would add to his
advice is that once 3:2 Pulldown When Playback is enabled, you get the
option to select a frame rate called 23.976 {29.97 internally), which is the
one you want to make it fully DVD compliant. Also, make sure you don't tick
3:2 Pulldown under the Advanced tab, but use the one under the video tab.
It's a very common mistake.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

erratic <erratic@reply-to.address> wrote:
: I'm not really familiar with inverse 3:2 pulldown, but if it's done
: properly it should be better than keeping the film interlaced, because
: after IVTC the encoder only has to encode 23.976 non-interlaced frames
: per second instead of 29.97 frames (some interlaced). Progressive frames
: are easier for an encoder. There are fewer frames to encode, so each
: frame gets more bits if you use the same bitrate; or you can lower the
: bitrate without losing quality. (Obviously you will only save disc space

Thanks.

--Leonid

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

McAllan <fghj@tyui.tyu> wrote:
: For best results, use AVIsynth to perform the IVTC and get you the 23.976
: progressive video. Feed that into TMPGenc and encode with the DVD (film)
: template like Erratic explained. The only correction I would add to his

There was no DVD film template, so I just made my own.

: advice is that once 3:2 Pulldown When Playback is enabled, you get the
: option to select a frame rate called 23.976 {29.97 internally), which is the

Yes, thanks.. Originally I chose 23.976 progressive and obviously it didn't
load into my authoring software.

: one you want to make it fully DVD compliant. Also, make sure you don't tick
: 3:2 Pulldown under the Advanced tab, but use the one under the video tab.
: It's a very common mistake.

Yeah. I wanted to do it with AVISynth 'cause it should give much better quality
than TMPGenc one. Thanks.

--Leonid