2019-02-03 11:58 GMT+01:00, Ulf Zibis <ulf.zi...@gmx.de>: > > Am 01.02.19 um 20:00 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos: >>> But for the rest of the video, I'm wondering that I nowhere notice such >>> dropouts. IIRC I read, that the film was produced with a budget of >>> 20.000 DM, which IMHO is not enough for a 76 min. celluloid film. >>> >>> Additionally in the turning camera scene from 2:34 I see comb >>> artifacts, which are typical for interlaced video recordings (see >>> attached extractions). >> Definitely not interlaced (could be de-interlaced, but this doesn't >> make much difference because of the other visual issues). > > Would you agree, that the original master recording probably was an > analogue interlaced video tape, maybe early Betacam or high quality > VHS camera, but later processed somehow, what corrupted the > original interlaced content?
I cannot rule that out although I find progressive recording more likely. > Otherwise I can't explain the comb artefacts at some > areas. I don't really see them, I see many artefacts. Please lets agree on two things: (In general) you cannot output interlaced video like it worked on CRT TVs until (at least) the eighties. It just doesn't work, no matter if you claim it could work for a fourth time in this thread or not (not even with a CRT computer screen). (Specifically for your file) you may be able to improve quality with denoise filters (and possibly other filters) but this is in no way related to the video being de-interlaced or not. Carl Eugen _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
