|
|
Posted by Teeafit on 11/14/06 14:49
Martin Heffels <<Playback on a computer should be fine though.>>
That's what I thought, and I'll make that suggestion on my sales page
when I break the news to the NTSC customers (see below).
Jukka Aho <<are we sure the OP's PAL original is like that?>>
Yes, bog-standard interlaced PAL. It's been suggested on another forum
that I should have exported a progressive version and got the
facilities house to standards-convert that. Interesting, and worth
trying another time... but THIS Christmas is upon us!
<<The stated difference between Alchemist Ph.C and the old-fashioned
field-blending/field-dropping/field-duplication standards conversion
methods is that Alchemist Ph.C analyzes the material for moving objects
or overall motion, such as pans, constructs a set of motion vectors,
and
synthesizes new frames out of thin air. In these synthesized frames,
which were never actually shot with a camera, moving objects reside in
positions that are in-between of their positions in the original
frames.
There's no discontinuity in the motion, and there are no several frames
blended to each other. Or so the theory goes, at least.>>
Wow -- fiendish cunning, these boffins! Again, maybe good to know for
another time. Likewise <<Avisynth>>.
No, I've decided to go ahead with the PAL versions and put them on
sale, and make grovelling apologies to the potential NTSC customers and
explain that to get decent quality they'll have to be patient for just
a little longer. It's not the end of the world to take the majority of
the NTSC converted tape and use that as the basis of the programme, but
re-make the grahics as part of the NTSC timeline -- after all, I have
the original building blocks and settings in the PAL Project, so it
should be relatively easy.
Thanks again for all your inputs -- helps a lot to get the mind round
the problem.
GRAEME ALDOUS, Teeafit Sound & Vision, Yorkshire
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|