Do you really need to set the Fields in Sequence Settings?

[John Stanowski]

Hi, I was wondering if it really matters whether or not you set the Fields to Progressive or Upper in the Sequence Settings of a sequence.

I basically just realized that I have mixed settings on 3 sequences. They are for local TV commercials. My :30 sequence was set to Upper and the two :15's were set to Progressive.

Does it really matter what these are set to when I go to render since I set that in Media Encoder?

Most of my footage is 1920x1080 at 29.976. But there are some 23.976 clips in there. 
I need to export all three sequences to both 1920x1080 and 1280x720. (So many tv stations still use 1280x720).

Again, just wondering if it matters what I have "Fields" set to in the Sequence settings for each sequence.

[Meg The Dog]

Yes, it has consequences.

Most broadcasters provide specifications for delivery that detail what kind of file they expect to get (such as interlaced versus progressive, audio configurations, etc.) and what file specs will pass quality control. 

You need to obtain these specifications and match your files for delivery accordingly.

MtD

[John Stanowski]

When I export, I'm very careful to match the station's specs. 
But what I'm asking is, does it matter what the Sequence Settings say about fields during editing.

E.g. #1 - I have a 1080i edit with 1080i clips but the the Fields are set to Progressive in the Sequence Settings. But when I render, I set Fields to Upper in the render settings.

E.g. #2 - I have a 1080i edit with 1080i clips and Fields is set to Upper in the Sequence Settings. But when I export to 720p, I set fields to Progressive in the output settings. 

Are either of these scenarios bad?

[Michael Grenadier]

If you have interlaced footage and you're outputting progressive, you're gonna lose quality unless you jump thru some hoops...  years ago, apple compressor had a very high quality conversion from interlaced to progressive.  Not sure if it's still possible in the newer compressor.   But do some googling and you'll find that there are no great solutions for this issue...  

[Andy 1968]

Adobe can mix progressive and interlaced video just fine. Interlaced video should be seen on broadcast compliant hardware. That being said you should invest in the Blackmagic Design Intensity Shuttle to check the composition, color space, motion etc. It is money well spent. Premiere Pro works fantastic with the Intensity Shuttle when outputting 1080i and 720 P at 60fps.  The link below might be worth watching.

https://youtu.be/u_gOE67i-MI  

[Michael Grenadier]

gotta disagree with you. saying that interlaced video should be seen
on broadcast compliant hardware is NOT always possible. If you're
delivering for viewing on a computer monitor which is mainly what most
people are doing nowadays there will be a noticeable degradation in
visual quality if your source is interlaced. You need to find a way
to combine the 2 fields not just drop one of the fields and lose half
of the information in the source.

[Andy 1968]

Why would anyone deliver interlaced video to social websites or play it back on a PC?

I am hip to feilds vs frames. That being said with Premiere Pro you can export interlaced video at 60 FPS to social media sites for viewing on a PC. The video will look fantastic. You can even upscale VHS with decent results. I see people use OBS, Virtual Dub, Hand Brake etc and have much worse quality that I can achieve with a Fire Wire based DV converter and Premiere Pro. Here is another video link that might be helpful.

https://youtu.be/dVLUxRkPMdA  

[Michael Grenadier]

so you're dropping your 29.97 fps material in a 59.97fps timeline so
each field becomes it's own frame and outputting at 59.97fps? And
youtube plays it correctly? .. I haven't had time to watch the
youtube videos... but will try and get to this and run some
tests... I can see this won't probably work for my current bete noir,
a streaming film festival of documentaries from the 60's and '70's
that need to be played using vimeo/livestream. Have a feeling the
higher frame rate will be problematic.

[RjL190365]

It can't really be done there. If one drops in 29.97 fps footage into a 59.94 timeline, every single frame of that original footage will simply be doubled. There is absolutely no way around that at all whatsoever. One cannot create new frames with content that simply does not exist.

[Andy 1968]

Premiere Pro can take interlaced video and export at 60P with good results for social media. My end result at 60P looks as good on a computer monitor as the original interlaced video on broadcast equipment. If I export at 30P it will look horrible as expected. That being said you can mix and match video clips 30P, 60P 1080i and Premiere Pro and the Intensity Shuttle will play it back to broadcast compliant equipment for better realtime previews than any other NLE. You can drop it in a 1080i timeline or 720P 60FPS timeline and see what it will look like when broadcasted to other TV sets in the USA. FCPX and DaVinci Resolve do not have the same image quality as Premiere Pro when using the Intensity Shuttle. It is a good investment if you do work for broadcast.

[RjL190365]

Sorry. I should have made it clear that my previous post was applicable if the footage was 29.97p to begin with.

And yes. I agree with both you and Averdahl that 29.97i footage should be put in a 29.97i timeline (and the field order should exactly match) for best results. And the output frame rate and field order should be either 29.97i or 59.94p, as well: Going from 29.97i to 29.97p will automatically degrade the image right there. Only do that if you're going to export the video as 29.97p for upload to certain websites that won't accept frame rates above 30 fps.

And Averdahl's post mirrored my earluer post in this discussion: One should try to avoid de-interlacing and re-interlacing footage that was originally shot interlaced as much as possible.

[RjL190365]

Both scenarios are bad.

In the first instance, you will deinterlace and then re-interlace. Every single broadcaster will reject that footage. Therefore, the only way to preserve the interlacing is to create a new UFF timeline for your interlaced footage, and then export that as UFF interlaced. That way, you will avoid deinterlacing and re-interlacing on the fly.

In the second instance, 29.97 fps is not a broadcast-accepted frame rate for 720p. Only 23.976p or 59.94p. (And that's for "NTSC" countries.)

And this is for production programs rather than mere news footage.

[Averdahl]

Again, just wondering if it matters what I have "Fields" set to in the Sequence settings for each sequence.

Yes, it does indeed matter. For example, if you edit 1080i footage in a progressive sequence with the intention to export it as interlaced you will loose quality if you use a progressive sequence. 1080i footage should always be edited in an interlaced sequence and it will come out as pristine footage when you export to 1080i and/if you export to 720p60. If you export to 720p30 you will notice that the motion in the image is stuttery, especially on camera pans or when a car or something else moves from right to left or vice versa. Look at peoples hands when they talk, if you notice carefully it will look strange and stuttery when they move their hands. In short, all motion will look un-natural.

If you drop 1080i on a progressive sequence you will de-interlace the footage and that by itself will degrade the footage. If you then will try to export that footage as interlaced you introduce a re-interlacing. If you had kept the footage interlaced from start to finish the outcome will look better. Aim for better looking output.