Hello all I was wondering if you can help me stretch my noggin around something that is bothering me.
8mm film is not interlaced, all the cine-conversion companies I have come across seem to be transferring their 8mms using interlaced filming techniques. The one company I came across that claimed to be using progressive; were using was a Panasonic Lumix GH1. I got all excited but then read that
Quote:
Panasonic advertises the GH1 as a 24P video camera, it’s really only a 60i camera. It shoots 60 frames of partly interlaced footage per second and relies on its users to remove all those extra unwanted frames in post
|
So is the reason they are all using interlaced cameras because of the frame rate difference? Would shooting it using a progressive method on a DSLR introduce flicker then? my mind is shouting at me "of course it would" but I need someone who actually knows about this stuff to set my mind at ease.
-------------
part 2
I'll continue writing under the assumption that it *has* to be interlaced in order to get it to play correctly at the right speed.
I want to upload to youtube, which as I read either forces it's own de-interlacing filter on the video, or requires you to deinterlace your own footage. letting youtube do the deinterlacing could potentially be very destructive to the video.
Why does it have to be interlaced that is the method? Can you not just duplicate frames and make a progressive recording? And if so, surely that must be the "correct" method and would cause the least destruction in the long run; as there would be no conversion for youtube or indeed other progressive viewing devices.