Thanks Paul. I will test it out when I get home and "report" back.

OK, success to report. I tried two things to get the movie look and got the same desired result. One, the DVFilmMaker and two, simply rendered the video using progressive scan. As a newbie I had no idea this feature existed and even if I saw it I wouldn't have known what it was for. Thanks to your advice Paul, I was able to learn all that from the DVFilmMaker website.

Does VV4 "handle" native 24p video from a camcorder like the DVX100? What settings are required in VV?

Rafalk, if you continue to test I think you'll see you'll get a lot better results from DVFilmMaker than just de-interlacing. If you test enough you'll see that in de-interlacing you lose resolution where you don't need to. Secondly DVFilmMaker has a feature "Blur Horizontal Lines" that really gives it that film look. Every time the camera pans quickly it looks more like it was shot with a 24p with a slow shutter speed.

I did tests on about 2 minutes of video shot outdoors a while back and the resolution increase was very noticable in the DVFilmMaker version over simply deinterlacing. It's somewhat subjective, and you may not see it like I do, but I'm convinced that DVFilmMaker is a lot more "convincing" in it's film look.

i'm very curious also. What king of results can one get if they shot minidv video?

For videoarts, Vegas edits 24p, but you need DVFilmMaker to process it. If you have a DVX100 there are posts regarding the process.

And ReneH, what we're talking about here is shooting minidv and then giving it a film look. Never can equal true film but the idea is to add a little luster to your videos to make it look like it "might" have been shot on film.

Another thing you will want to do is alter the gamma curve. Video tends to have a flat curve whereas film is more S shaped. I'm a real VV newbie but i think there is an effect called color curves that will do it for you. You also might want to increase colour saturation.

Probably one of the best things you can do is to light your shots properly. That will have a huge effect on the "film look"

Aaron

Exactly! Now that I have V4 I use the Color Correction filter to increase saturation, a Color Curve to flatten the highs and lows and bring out detail, and DVFilmMaker to add subtle grain and a deinterlaced look. I've been editing my brother's trip to Paris and Italy and I'm getting fantastic results. Looks very cinematic. (If only my brother wasn't new to all this! Zoom-in, zoom-out, pan here, pan there! My major chore has been using slowmo and 0 velocity at times just to make a lot of it viewable :) )

Let me show some ignorance as a platform for education from those of you with better knowledge.

Primarily I am curious about how you are delivering the final product after you have achieved the particular look you desire without re-introducing interlacing.

1> Are you rendering as a progressive 23.97 mpeg and then using pulldown for 29.976 playback?

Actually, it's all at 29.97 in my case. DVFilmMaker recommends you shoot at 60i interlaced to get the best results from their processing. After it's processed it's still 29.97 but "looks" deinterlaced and blurry in the right places, giving it a look almost like 24fps such as you would get with the Panasonic DVX100 (especially if you turn on the horizontal blur option in DVFilmMaker). Increasing saturation, flattening lows and highs and correcting color in Vegas are the other things that contribute to making it look more like film.

After I've processed the video with DVFilmMaker I archive it on DV tape and later create an NTSC-DV MPEG 2 file to be used in DVD authoring. Looks the same from the DVD on TV as from the DV Camera to TV.

Paul, thanks for the reply. So, is it safe to say that your output with your standard DV but >with< your color and gamma correction looks different than the full method you mentioned above? I am really confused as when you output back to DV tape don't you re-introduce interlacing?

Speaking of that, does anybody know exactly what the non-interlaced progressive render in Vegas is actually doing to the video? Is it throwing away every other line? I thought DV was always interlaced and this progressive scan option is throwing me for a loop.

Interlacing happens when you go to a home/broadcast video format.
Yet if you have processed two separately (in time) field samples and interleave them to approximate the equivalent frame taken together in time (blending or interpolating), then you get a film/progressive look. You can't serve everything by doing this when you didn't have this frame resolution in the first place (classic video cameras anyway).

So you can either take a progressive clip, or an interlaced clip forced to simulate progressive, and then present it accurately on an interleaved format target.

Indeed much sport and large public events by the major broadcasters are already shot in true progressive (sometimes HD sizes too), and then transcoded to a progressive time sample, subsequently split over two fields (but representing the same moment in time). You get a filmish look as some of the silken nature of 59.94/50 images per second has become 29.97/25. Of course this is wanted in this instance.

One day we won't have to jump through hoops to get the looks we want. We'll just film in whatever maximum capability format there is, and then either the migration to target or the user settings on their TV will choose what look things get. Some countries just don't get 3:2 pulldown, but have the pitch converted and the film length changes... Another dimension to this mess known as THE TRADE.

Hi guys

Will after effects deinterlace with no resolution loss?