23.976 to 29.97 in 2017. Which is the best solution on AME?

[Joao.Gri]

This is one of the enduring doubts for most of us, especially for those that never worked inside a broadcast station (my case). The context is the same as (almost) always. I'm mastering two documentaries for television and both were recorded and edited in 23.976 and broadcasters in Brazil ask for a XDCAM 4:2:2 50Mbits 60i - Stereo 48Khz 24bits, a very clear description. AME has the preset, it is called XDCAM HD 50 NTSC 60i. So far so good.

I've been tinkering with these matter and ended up with two possible workflows that render different results. Here they are:

WORKFLOW 1:

1. Export a MASTER with the native settings: 1920x1080 @ 23.976 on DNxHD 10bits, because the source files were 10 bits.

2. Transcode the file to the XDCAM HD 50 NTSC 60i directly.

The 3:2 pulldown works correctly but on the "2" I get this. On top of that, it plays jittery. I've been told that this happens because I'm playing it directly to my computer monitor, that this will not happen on broadcasting.

WORKFLOW 2:

1. Export a MASTER with the native settings: 1920x1080 @ 23.976 on DNxHD 10bits, because the source files were 10 bits.

2. Transcode the file to a DNxHD @ 29.97p. Forcing a progressive 3:2 pulldown.

3. Transcode the DNxHD @ 29.97p to the XDCAM HD 50 NTSC 60i.

This way, playing on my monitor, everything goes smoothly! I barely feel the 3:2 pulldown. I do know that there is a theoretical loss in quality, but it is so small that even by pixel peeping I barely find anything.

Are both of these workflows correct? Are both of them wrong? Is there a better way to do it(to record @ 29.97 is not an option.. that boat has sailed)? Will they work the same on broadcasting?

Thank you very much!

[Joao.Gri]

Help? Please.

[SAFEHARBOR11 · Accepted solution]

I have a suggestion - get yourself a video output device, such as a Black Magic Mini Monitor for instance. This will take the playback from Premiere and output an actual VIDEO signal with correct timing and color space, rather than being a computer display approximation. Therefore if you play a 50i timeline in Premiere, you can get true 1080i out of Premiere to your TV display using HDMI or HD-SDI and see what the end result truly looks like, and would look to others after you deliver. Remove the guesswork of how the interlaced video might look, which you currently can't know watching a progressive computer preview.

I don't know if you work on a PC or Mac. Mini Monitor can be had as a PCI-e card, or there is a Thunderbolt version. Very small black box, Thunderbolt IN, video signal OUT. AJA makes similar units. For professional work, you really need something like this for preview while editing.

Workflow 2 makes sense to me based on your screen grabs, however you might find that if you can view Workflow 1 on a real TV display as interlaced 1080i, the interlacing might actually make the cadence look smoother, covering the jump in rhythm between frames.

Thanks

Jeff Pulera

Safe Harbor Computers

[Joao.Gri]

Thank you SAFEHARBOR11​!

I do agree with you.

A output card is needed, but on those circumstances I did not have any available. The material was accepted by the broadcaster, after going through quality control. So that is good news.

Just for clarification, I do work on PC.

Once more, thank you very much.