Skip to main content
Soshman
Soshman
Inspiring
July 3, 2017
Question

Compression for Progressive vs. Interlaced changes quality?

  • July 3, 2017
  • 1 reply
  • 1074 views

A few months ago while researching some old video i did with my camera i noticed the quality of the .mp4 i made was much clearer than what it has been lately and i have not been able to figure out why because the settings in PP have remained the same since i bought the camera...or so i thought.

When i looked a bit closer i saw that the setting of the input was 1080 60i and output was progressive.

Now i may have changed it several years ago while filming some waterfalls and forgot to change it back to 1080 30p fx

I am leaving at the end of the week for a 3 week shoot and edit for a seminar and want the end product as best as possible.

Wondering if anyone thinks that rendering from 1080 60i to progressive ,mp4 might degrade the end result more than going from 1080 30p to progressive output ,mp4?

Could it also improve my render times?

Thanks for any thoughts on this

Mark

    This topic has been closed for replies.

    1 reply

    E
    excited_Genie16B8
    Legend
    July 3, 2017

    I think you should shoot and export at the same settings.

    I'm not a fan of interlaced, and 30p is kind of a non-standard, so I recommend shooting only the following:

    720p/24

    720p/60

    1080p/24

    Soshman
    SoshmanAuthor
    Inspiring
    July 5, 2017

    Hey Jim!

    Thanks for this.

    Can you please give me an idea of why you like 24 over 30?

    Also when you say it is the "non-standard" I wasn't sure what you meant

    Cheers,

    Mark

    M
    Meg The Dog
    Inspiring
    July 5, 2017

    "Standards are great, that's why there are so many of them!"

    As a differing opinion, 75% of the work I do is going to be broadcast at 1080 60i, I routinely work with material shot at 30p. I edit on a 30p timeline, then make the interlaced version for broadcast during export.

    To me (totally subjective comment) 30p hits the sweet spot between 60i origination - which looks "video-ey" and 24p which creates a staccato appearance in medium to fast pans or zooms. 24p also requires the introduction of frame pull down for conversion to be broadcast at 1080 60i, which acerbates this.

    Note - some people like this, as it looks (to them) cinematic. It's up to each editor and their client to decide what they like best.

    One more note - interlaced material only looks as it should when it is viewed on an interlaced monitor (a TV set).  Computer screens are not interlaced, they are progressive and they show artifacts that are not (or very much less)  noticeable when viewed on an interlaced TV.

    My two cents.

    MtD

      Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
      Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices