SD interlaced footage ghosting on import in Resolve?

I have captured some VHS footage with my BMD Intensity Shuttle Thunderbolt to ProRes 422 interlaced. The footage looks good, but as soon as I bring it into Resolve, I get ghosting. It is visible on the Media page, edit page, on my grading monitor, and in the exported files. I have field processing enabled and enable fields in delivery. The clip attributes have the proper frame rate, video data level, NTSC pixel aspect, and changing the field dominance makes no difference. The screenshot is playing in Media Express. On the left is the captured footage, on the right exported from Resolve with absolutely no changes made. Any ideas on what to look for?

Open pic in new tab for full size

Erich

Resolve-ghosting-example2.jpg (587.21 KiB) Viewed 19953 times

The just released Resolve 5.2.2 has the same problem.

Could someone please download and try out these 2 example clips that shows the problem I'm seeing? Tech support doesn't seem to think there is anything wrong. The first clip is an SD interlaced capture of a simple black screen with the word PLAY shown. In the exported clip the edges are not as distinct. No edits were done, just import and export. The second clip is to show clearly what I'm seeing over the whole frame, leaving everything soft and with the ghosting lines shown in the first screen capture.

Thank you,
Erich

https://www.dropbox.com/s/csyl10guzek5p6q/EML-Resolve-ghosting-problem.zip?dl=0

example-export-screenshot.jpg (137.4 KiB) Viewed 19888 times

I just gave it a try.

I can see the ripples too, but after disabling "enable video field processing" from the timeline format in the project settings, they are gone and letting Resolve deinterlace the footage gives a clean result. So it has something to do with the way the fields are processed. One problem I can see is that your footage is a 3:2-pull-down from film footage. This might interfere with the field processing of Resolve.

One problem I can see is that your footage is a 3:2-pull-down from film footage. This might interfere with the field processing of Resolve.

This may be the problem. You need to remove 3:2 pulldown and then treat your source as 23.976p.
You can use Vdub(2) to remove 3:2 pulldown (it's quite good even with broken patterns).

Thank you for looking into this, I've been pulling out my hair.

How were you able to determine it was a 3:2 pull-down from film? In fact the original was shot on 16mm film, then transferred to NTSC tape for editing, and the VHS was made from those tape masters.

I have video field processing enabled because I was using filters such as sharpening and others that the manual states need it enabled for rendering when exporting interlaced files. I was going to go back to SD DVDs, so wanted to avoid deinterlacing then interlacing again. Is that still the case, or is the manual not correct that I need to enable it both in the project and in the delivery settings?

Since I'm capturing, is the best flow still capture at 525i59.94 from the VHS, then remove the pulldown, then into Resolve, or should I capture at 525p59.94 for the pulldown then into Resolve? Since I'm doing the pulldown, I still need to deinterlace, don't I?

One last question, when you say after pulldown treat the source as 23.976p, then I need to export from Resolve at 29.97 for the DVD, correct, or should I let the mpeg encoder do that when creating the DVDs?

Man, no wonder the world doesn't use much interlacing any more, it gives me a headache.

Thanks again,
Erich

It's been a while since I was fighting a similar battle with pull-down SD video, also from 16mm source. For starters, try the Grass Valley codecs instead. You can't export Prores interlaced, and that could be at least one source of the artifacts you're seeing out of Resolve. You're exporting progressive but without an actual conversion. I'm also not convinced that deinterlacing works properly in Resolve.

A less helpful suggestion is to find another editing program for this project, even a fairly primitive one. The cheap (or free) consumer NLEs may be better for handling SD interlaced. Or Premiere, for long as you need it. Edius also managed the footage, as I recall, if you have access to a PC. Resolve's origins as a true NLE post-date the world of evil interlaced footage.

How were you able to determine it was a 3:2 pull-down from film? In fact the original was shot on 16mm film, then transferred to NTSC tape for editing, and the VHS was made from those tape masters.

If you look field by field you can easily see the pattern.

I have video field processing enabled because I was using filters such as sharpening and others that the manual states need it enabled for rendering when exporting interlaced files.

I would first go to progressive before you apply any filters. And, please, do not use sharpening of VHS sources, there is already enough edge "enhancement" as it is.

I was going to go back to SD DVDs, so wanted to avoid deinterlacing then interlacing again. Is that still the case, or is the manual not correct that I need to enable it both in the project and in the delivery settings?

Some tools can do filtering with interlaced video but Resolve is not one of them. You would need to go from inverse telecine -> progressive -> processing -> telecine.

Since I'm capturing, is the best flow still capture at 525i59.94 from the VHS, then remove the pulldown, then into Resolve, ....

That's the best way. But capturing interlaced or telecined VHS footage using 4:2:2 subsampling may be problematic, if possible I would stay with the original subsampling of 4:2:0 for capture.

One last question, when you say after pulldown treat the source as 23.976p, then I need to export from Resolve at 29.97 for the DVD, correct, or should I let the mpeg encoder do that when creating the DVDs?

The best option would be to soft telecine the progressive edit and render as mpeg2. At any rate, I would not use Resolve for that.

Here is the video properly inverse telecined (and I also converted the video from Rec601 to Rec709 and performed a denoise. But obviously for DVD you need Rec601) using various Vapoursynth filters:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/k9odei3du6sne ... d.mov?dl=0

inverse-telecined.jpeg (100.52 KiB) Viewed 19844 times

Thank you, that answers a lot of questions.

I'm on a Mac, so has anyone used Compressor and the reverse-telecine option in retiming to go to 23.976 progressive, or is it worth it to go to Virtualdub or Vapoursynth?

Erich

Hello,

I tested your clip (1) (with clip attribute 'Deinterlace) and push Contrast and SAT:

INTERLACED_NOISE__CONTRAST_1_00__SAT_100.jpg

Next use clip attribute and use this settings :

INTERLACED_NOISE__CONTRAST_1_00__SAT_100_and_clip_attribute.jpg

try to use chroma noise reduction and test (here not used). Maybe just a last 'small' sharpen.. test.. (here not used)

That's very interesting, I never would have considered super scaling in this situation. I'll take a closer look at it.

Thanks,
Erich

That's very interesting, I never would have considered super scaling in this situation. I'll take a closer look at it.

Seriously I would not, you are ruining your footage this way.

That's very interesting, I never would have considered super scaling in this situation. I'll take a closer look at it.

Seriously I would not, you are ruining your footage this way.

Cary,
You have to develop your answer.

That's very interesting, I never would have considered super scaling in this situation. I'll take a closer look at it.

Seriously I would not, you are ruining your footage this way.

Is that because you're effectively upscaling and then resizing the image all the time?

Erich

That's very interesting, I never would have considered super scaling in this situation. I'll take a closer look at it.

Seriously I would not, you are ruining your footage this way.

Is that because you're effectively upscaling and then resizing the image all the time?

Erich

You can't resize/upscale something that is interlaced because an interlaced frame consists of two separate fields recorded at a different point in time.

[/quote]
You can't resize/upscale something that is interlaced because an interlaced frame consists of two separate fields recorded at a different point in time.[/quote]

We rescale and upsize legacy interlaced footage regularly. Can you elaborate on the reasoning behind your comment?

You can't resize/upscale something that is interlaced because an interlaced frame consists of two separate fields recorded at a different point in time.

We rescale and upsize legacy interlaced footage regularly. Can you elaborate on the reasoning behind your comment?

I do that as well but the rescaling happens when the footage is (temporary) made progressive.

You can't resize/upscale something that is interlaced because an interlaced frame consists of two separate fields recorded at a different point in time.

We rescale and upsize legacy interlaced footage regularly. Can you elaborate on the reasoning behind your comment?

I do that as well but the rescaling happens when the footage is (temporary) made progressive.

That is not necessary. You just need an interlaced aware scaler. It just splits the frame into separate fields, scales each field to the target resolution and weaves the fields together into one interlaced frame.
VirtualDub for example does it exactly like that when you check the box 'interlaced' in the resize filter.

Scaling by field is "cheap" approach. Proper one is very good deinterlacing to double fps and the scaling and interlacing back if needed. Only this guarantees best results. In case you have SD interlaced footage and want to upscale HD then good deinterlacing is the key to the whole process.

From time to time, it is good to remember ... (very old enough but always effective very often)

http://www.100fps.com/

You could call it:
Progressive scan
Bob+Weave
Intelligent
Adaptive
Hybrid

BMD Davinci Resolve now offers a lot of options ... To test

Scaling by field is "cheap" approach. Proper one is very good deinterlacing to double fps and the scaling and interlacing back if needed. Only this guarantees best results. In case you have SD interlaced footage and want to upscale HD then good deinterlacing is the key to the whole process.

Very true!

Here is a comparison between an interlaced source made progressive using QTGMC (using frame doubling), which is a motion compensated deinterlacer, and then scaled using a neural based scaler and the same source scaled interlaced and made progressive in Resolve:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/50mb1ob4ucijd ... e.mov?dl=0

It is important to view the video at source resolution.

.../...
Here is the video properly inverse telecined (and I also converted the video from Rec601 to Rec709 and performed a denoise. But obviously for DVD you need Rec601) using various Vapoursynth filters:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/k9odei3du6sne ... d.mov?dl=0

inverse-telecined.jpeg

Cary, no better results?

Scaling by field is "cheap" approach. Proper one is very good deinterlacing to double fps and the scaling and interlacing back if needed. Only this guarantees best results. In case you have SD interlaced footage and want to upscale HD then good deinterlacing is the key to the whole process.

Agreed, Andrew. I just wanted to point out, that it is possible to scale interlaced footage.

From time to time, it is good to remember ... (very old enough but always effective very often)

http://www.100fps.com/

Ah, the old days

Funny to read:
Motion compensation
Professional hardware equipment can get very expensive. How expensive? Can you say $50'000? Or think $100'000? Then spell T-E-R-A-N-E-X. This is equipment as used for professional broadcasting.

Funny because I have a Teranex AV sitting right next to me...

And it never did proper fps conversion as far as I understand. Even today people believe it can, but all what it does is good deinterlacing.

Scaling by field is "cheap" approach. Proper one is very good deinterlacing to double fps and the scaling and interlacing back if needed. Only this guarantees best results. In case you have SD interlaced footage and want to upscale HD then good deinterlacing is the key to the whole process.

Agreed, Andrew. I just wanted to point out, that it is possible to scale interlaced footage.

Yes, better this way then using progressive approach for interlaced footage. In some cases it can be good, but it breaks "static" parts of the footage.

From time to time, it is good to remember ... (very old enough but always effective very often)

http://www.100fps.com/

Thank you for posting that link. It's by far the best explanation of the subject I've read.

Erich

I imported aaf from Premiere to Resolve (latest version) and it came with this problem as you can see in the image.
I did all the color grading, and even though when the file is exported the image gets better I can still see this problem
This is a job and I have to deliver it soon.

Can somebody help me??

In order to answer any questions, you need to tell us about the source footage. Where is it from, is it interlaced or telecined? What are your project and timeline settings?

This looks like a normal interlaced footage.
You either preserve interlacing (set project to accordingly) or you need to deinterlace it all (but Resolve's deinterlacing is not very good).

Here it goes what I know:

The source footage: 29.97 fps; 1920x1080

The project setting:29.97 fps and more details in the image bellow

It doesn't work even when I open a new project and import a single clip, changing the settings to match the source.

I'm new to Resolve and color grading in general.

Dropbox a small source clip so we can help you.

It could be the wrong field dominance in the project and/or incorrect interlace settings, and also that you're exporting to a format which doesn't actually handle interlaced footage. The system won't tell you.

Try the Grass Valley codecs. Your screenshots are too small, even with browser enlargement, to be of much use.

It could be the wrong field dominance in the project and/or incorrect interlace settings, and also that you're exporting to a format which doesn't actually handle interlaced footage. The system won't tell you.

Try the Grass Valley codecs. Your screenshots are too small, even with browser enlargement, to be of much use.

for the screenshots, try this: download/file.php?id=27124

Grass Valley codec for what? How to use it and why?

I export to H264 format.

Dropbox a small source clip so we can help you.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/p9dtr4dcalds5 ... 1.MTS?dl=0

Hope you guys can help me with this one.

It seems to have no problem with the source, but when it gets to Resolve...

Export h.264 interlaced? I'm not sure that's possible and even if it is, could Resolve manage it? Somebody here may be of more help on that one.

Grass Valley is an intermediate codec which, unlike Prores or DnxHD, seems to manage to export interlaced footage in Resolve, though these results were from an older Resolve version, maybe 12 or 14.

In all, you might have more luck if you de-interlaced this footage outside Resolve, and then brought it in.

The footage looks normal on my system. Try de-selecting "use video field processing" on the Master preferences.

If you pause the footage, you'll see interlaced combing artifacts, but that's normal.

Turn on "enable video field processing", do the grade, don't touch DVE effects, export to MXF Sony mpeg4 or XAVC with field rendering flag on...it's kinda good h.264 and it works it works 60 fps smooth in MPC-HC which means it's interlaced properly by Resolve and deinterlaced properly by the player

P.S. @John Paines: "video field processing" absolutely needs to be turned on! He just needs an interlaced output card to monitor interlace properly which he probably doesn't have so he'll have to work "blind" and render out the result to scrutinize properly in another player. He could strip a field in fusion tab just for working, then disable the strip for final output

That footage is a problem, time resolution is not 1/60s as proper interlaced material should be, it's decimated. After deinterlacing externally the result is duplicate frames. Are you sure this is out-of-camera footage?

H.264 can carry interlaced video but you have to supply the correct parameters during encoding.

P.S. @John Paines: "video field processing" absolutely needs to be turned on!

This is what the manual says about "enable video field processing":

On the other hand, regardless of whether you’re outputting interlaced or progressive frame
media, if you’re not filtering or resizing your clips, and you’re only applying
adjustments to color and contrast, it’s not necessary to turn on field processing for
interlaced material, and in fact, leaving it off may somewhat shorten your project’s
rendering time.

The last time I fooled with interlaced footage, that setting ruined the titles. That's pretty much all I remember about it.

P.S. @John Paines: "video field processing" absolutely needs to be turned on!

This is what the manual says about "enable video field processing":

On the other hand, regardless of whether you’re outputting interlaced or progressive frame
media, if you’re not filtering or resizing your clips, and you’re only applying
adjustments to color and contrast, it’s not necessary to turn on field processing for
interlaced material, and in fact, leaving it off may somewhat shorten your project’s
rendering time.

The last time I fooled with interlaced footage, that setting ruined the titles. That's pretty much all I remember about it.

The manual is right, if you do anything that will do extra-pixel calculations like blur, you'll destroy the interlace. I didn't know what the OP wants to do with the picture exactly, so checking it is the safest option

If it ruined the titles, more info is needed to determine why that happened. I suspect it has more to do with common "Titles in interlaced format" than with Resolve processing.

That footage is a problem, time resolution is not 1/60s as proper interlaced material should be, it's decimated. After deinterlacing externally the result is duplicate frames. Are you sure this is out-of-camera footage?.

I put it into Virtualdub2 and I'm not seeing that problem either frame rate doubled or discarding fields with the standard yadif deinterlacing filter. But then I'm also not understanding the poster's problem other than seeing normal interlacing.

Erich

That footage is a problem, time resolution is not 1/60s as proper interlaced material should be, it's decimated. After deinterlacing externally the result is duplicate frames. Are you sure this is out-of-camera footage?.

I put it into Virtualdub2 and I'm not seeing that problem either frame rate doubled or discarding fields with the standard yadif deinterlacing filter. But then I'm also not understanding the poster's problem other than seeing normal interlacing.

Erich

A correctly interlaced source should have a temporal resolution of 1/50 or 1/60.
Select frame doubling in your filter and you will notice each frame is duplicated.

Your footage does not have any duplicate frames or field.
If your are not going to use moving graphics, transitions or titles in your final production
I suggest you convert your footage to Prores 422 and retain the interlacing before importing it into Resolve.
If you are going to have the above, then do not use Resolve as it simply does not handle interlacing correctly.
If you have to use Resolve for editing, deinterlace it before importing.
It certainly needs converting before any editing if you wish to retain the best quality.

I imported aaf from Premiere to Resolve (latest version) and it came with this problem as you can see in the image.
I did all the color grading, and even though when the file is exported the image gets better I can still see this problem
This is a job and I have to deliver it soon.

Can somebody help me??

This is normal interlaced footage. The question is whether your delivery format is progressive or interlaced. If it's progressive then you will need to deinterlace the source footage. If it's interlaced you only need to set the interlace check boxes in project settings and deliver page.

Interlaced formats are common for broadcast and progressive for internet delivery.
If it will only be viewed on a computer device then make it progressive.

If it's progressive then you will need to deinterlace the source footage. If it's interlaced you only need to set the interlace check boxes in project settings and deliver page.

If there are to be any effects, titles or transitions they will not be correctly interlaced.
The best solution if it needs to remain interlaced, is to convert it to 59.95 progressive do the editing and then re-interlace.
I have done it many times in PAL and it comes out well if its all done properly.

I checked it again, it is normal interlaced footage, with a correct time resolution.
I was mistaken.

Sorry.

Here's some quick basic color grading + lens blur done on an excerpt from the original video, with "video field processing" enabled, exported to Sony MXF XAVC (field rendering on):

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Kt-q5 ... fMg8ZDJU2z

for more elaborate per-field effects, Fusion tab comes to the rescue with the fields node...no need to pre-deinterlace...not for the faint of heart, though...

I'm reading all the discussion and testing what I can here.

First of all, thank you for the help.
But, unfortunately, the problem remains.

Did someone put the clip on Resolve and it was exactly like the source?
If yes, can you send me the configurations? Because when I import, it's always the same with this clips. I never had this problem before.

the link for the source is here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/p9dtr4dcalds5 ... 1.MTS?dl=0
I noticed that when I uploaded it, there was a little "i dont know how to called it" (but the image is kind of doubling during movements) but still, when I import it on Resolve you can see that the problem is something different.

As you can see (resolve import x source): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kk9Ir3 ... sp=sharing
I did nothing but import and export the video.
I made sure that the video field processing was selected

When exporting I tried the constant bitrate selected and not selected too. No changes.
What bothers me is that the problem is visible before exporting. I guess it's not a problem of exportation.

@Victor, you are missing the point. It's supposed to look like that. It's not a problem. That's interlace. It can never look different in Resolve because that's how things are in Resolve, since it does not deinterlace for screen preview like other NLEs do. Only when you play the exported file in a video player does the interlace work out and you don't see those "artifacts". Also you need a video player that properly plays interlaced video so if you see frame doubling, your player is not doing it properly. Try MPC-HC.

Did you try playing my take on your material from the post above yours?

You should also let us know what your task is and what file format is expected from you by the client? Do they expect interlace or not i.e. exactly what they gave you, only color graded? If not, you can check deinterlace in "clip attributes" and be done with it.