Why is my export showing up as interlaced?

edited December 2017 in Pro Support

I'm working on a computer based Educator's Guide for a history project.  I'm editing a longer video into clips to fit a lesson plan.  Most of the footage came from archival sources with a variety of frame rates.

The original video looks okay in VLC -- there are no interlace artifacts even when Deinterlace is turned  off

The video looks okay on the Hitfilm Viewer

But once exported, and viewed in VLC, the video has interlace artifacts.

Here are my export settings -- any solutions for this?

H.264 Mp4

Scaling down from 1920x1080 to 1280x720
Level 4

Variable bitrate

Target bitrate 10Mbps
Max bitrate 15Mbps

Comments

  • Here is the MediaInfo dump:

    Format profile : Base Media / Version 2
    Codec ID : mp42
    File size : 5.44 GiB
    Duration : 1h 19mn
    Overall bit rate mode : Variable
    Overall bit rate : 9 774 Kbps
    Encoded date : UTC 2017-11-08 15:14:42
    Tagged date : UTC 2017-11-08 15:16:35
    ©TIM : 00:00:00:00
    ©TSC : 25
    ©TSZ : 1

    Video
    ID : 1
    Format : AVC
    Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
    Format profile : High@L4.1
    Format settings, CABAC : Yes
    Format settings, ReFrames : 4 frames
    Codec ID : avc1
    Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding
    Duration : 1h 19mn
    Bit rate mode : Variable
    Bit rate : 9 450 Kbps
    Maximum bit rate : 12.0 Mbps
    Width : 1 920 pixels
    Height : 1 080 pixels
    Display aspect ratio : 16:9
    Frame rate mode : Constant
    Frame rate : 25.000 fps
    Standard : PAL
    Color space : YUV
    Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
    Bit depth : 8 bits
    Scan type : Interlaced
    Scan order : Top Field First
    Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.182
    Stream size : 5.26 GiB (97%)
    Language : English
    Encoded date : UTC 2017-11-08 15:14:42
    Tagged date : UTC 2017-11-08 15:14:42
    Color primaries : BT.709
    Transfer characteristics : BT.709
    Matrix coefficients : BT.709

  • @Davlon ; I am not an expert by any stretch of the imagination but the Media report shows the footage in Interlaced.  Is this the original file or your export?  If it's the original, I would add the Deinterlace effect to it and try exporting and see if you still have the artifacts.  That's pretty much the extent of my knowledge on Interlacing.  Hopefully one of the Pros can give you more valuable observations.

  • I just watched Triem's tutorial on file optimization

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yqhl0mRuTng

    Yeah -- so it seems I was given an interlaced file to use.  I already edited and rendered 20 video clips.  Fortunately they were each a separate composite shot, so I can transcode in Handbrake and re-render.

    Never had to do this before.   

    Can anyone tell me -- if I'm transcoding to non-interlaced, will that change my edit points in existing composite shots? 

    More importantly, since I will need to re-render my existing 20 composite shots, will Hitfilm let me swap my original interlaced video for my transcoded non-interlaced version if I just remove the original file from the directory and give the fixed file the same name?

  • Hitfilm should recognize the transcoded files, no problem if... The transcoded file is the same length (so don't trim as you transcode), has the same filename and is in the same folder. Have Hitfilm closed when you make the swap, just to keep it clean. 

    Alternatively, you can right-click media files in the bin, select "Relink" and select the new files.

    You also COULD in this case just add Deinterlace to the original timeline. Depends on how complex the edit is whether it's faster to transcode or add that effect. 

  • edited December 2017

     Ack!   I'm re-rendering  work from the past several days.  This will take hours.

    I seem to remember Windows has an adjustment so you can give certain programs high priority -- or a greater amount of processor time/cycles. 

    Will this make Hitfilm render faster?  Overclocking?  (i7, 32GB RAM, ASUS GTX760 video card)

     

  • edited December 2017

    "I seem to remember Windows has an adjustment so you can give certain programs high priority -- or a greater amount of processor time/cycles. 

    Will this make Hitfilm render faster?"

    No. Any program running on Windows will get the whole machine if it can actually use all of it. Even a process set to "idle" priority will get the whole machine as long as nothing else is trying to run. 

    Priorities are all about what happens when you are running 2,3 or more separate applications at the same time. Who gets first dibs at CPU time.

    One thing you can do with your transcode sessions. Set Handbrake to a lower priority than "normal". Handbrake has a preferences (Advanced) that can handle this so you don't have to mess with operating system junk. Set Handbrake to Below Normal. Use such an option in any transcode app that has it. If only the transcode is running then it will use the whole machine. If you do some web browsing or email and such, then the transcode will take a backseat while you are doing that. Your foreground app will be responsive to your clicks and keyboard actions. 

    One thing to remember is that there is more dead time in application execution than you think. Even Hitfilm. e.g. While typing an email, there is a lot of dead/unused time in between each keystroke (or mouse move). Time where the app is waiting on you the user. Downloading files or browsing is mostly dead time. Even an idle priority background application will use the dead time in your foreground app.

  • For faster operations would you add RAM or buy a better graphics card ?

    I believe I remember reading that increased Nvidia cuda numbers don't change performance.  In a typical PC build, where is the bottleneck for Hitfilm? 

     

     

     

     

     

  • edited December 2017

    "For faster operations would you add RAM or buy a better graphics card ?"

    The answer is circumstance dependent. By circumstance I mean each project may have different requirements/needs.

    As for RAM. You probably have enough ram. Open Hitfilm, open one of your projects, let it play a little bit. Look at the task manager for how much RAM Hitfilm is using. I think you will find that Hitfilm is very efficient in its RAM needs/utilization. The biggest RAM requirement is normally the RAM preview buffer, if/when you use it. There will likely be a fair amount of RAM listed as free or "available" in the task manager. "Available" RAM is memory the operating system is using as disk cache memory. This memory is instantly given up if/when an application request more RAM and the RAM free list is empty.

    "Better graphic card"

    If your bottleneck is effets you are using then a faster GPU will help. Media file decode and encoder are done on the CPU. So a lot of time a faster CPU helps out more than GPU.

    "I believe I remember reading that increased Nvidia cuda numbers don't change performance."

    Nope. The increased number of stream processors is the primary differentiating factor between lower and higher end GPUs.

    "In a typical PC build, where is the bottleneck for Hitfilm?"

    What is "typical"? I don't think you can define it.

    Where is the bottleneck? Different projects, timelines or composites can have different bottlenecks. The CPU and GPU are both equally important. The CPU gets the timeline going/moving. If the basic timeline performance is not up to speed then it does not matter how awesome a GPU you have. Something that simultaneously composites a lot of different media files is going to want a lot of CPU. e.g. A base media file and a number of stock elements like fire, smoke explosions, embers and such. A pure CG scene like a space scene with 3D model space ships is not going to use much CPU as a % but you still want a CPU with a fast clock rate. If you have both elements in a project then one part of the project bottlenecks on one thing and another part bottlenecks on something else.

    I feel safe in some generalizations. 4-core CPU should be fine for 1080 projects. UHD/4k project really want more. 8-core for sure. In both cases you want equally fast clock rates. AVC media? You NEED as much clock rate as you can get. Much harder to do/get high clock rates with 8-core CPUs verses 4-core. For 1080 work a fast 7200rpm HD is probably fine most times. Especially since our excess RAM is used as a disk cache. For UHD/4k work the disk throughput requirements can become an issue depending on how many simultaneous media file streams you want to support. AVC is a REAL CPU problem at UHD/4k resolutions. Disk bandwidth not so much. Intermediates like Cineform are easier on the CPU than AVC but can become a disk I/O bandwidth issue at UHD/4k resolutions. Hitfilm lossless proxies are probably death at UHD/4k with hard disks due to I/O bandwidth issues. It's SSD time or a very fast striped RAID setup. How much RAM? "Enough". RAM amount is too project dependent but, as described, it easy to figure out.

     

Sign In or Register to comment.