What are the best encoding profile options to reduce ghosting?

[jimbobuk]

ok sorry..

Yeah.. that whole thing i just noticed now is a discussion on camcorders and how they handle things... its probably all from a similar thing.. to encode stuff it has to do something to the stream..

The first image i posted was done a few months before i actually posted on here so i can't exactly remember but yeah i think that may have been interlaced and then deinterlaced in some software player.. the latter grabs via virtualdub have no deinterlacing performed so you get more like the other jetski image with the saw tooth effect if there is any interlacing in there..

That first image does have 3 faces if you look close tho, something over time isn't getting flushed quick enough.. to be honest.. frame changes show it up quite badly too as the actual frame change hangs around a little too long.. can be very visible if the shots changed between are very different and nicely so that the blending can be cleanly seen (ie. a dark image with shapes, changing to a scene with a lot of light (leaving plenty of area for those dark images to be seen for a short while after the scene has long gone))

[mls]

What's going to make things even worse is when all the systems in the entire path of a TV signal are all completely changed over to digital (from the camera, thru the studio boards, transmitter, networks satelite up/down links, any other repeaters or transponders, and the cable systems.

With all the signal reprocessing at all those points in the chain... well, there will end up with so many flaws in the TV pic you get on you end that nothing you are discussing here will ever be able to correct for.

Anyone that has a satelite receiver already know how heavy clouds, thunderstorms, snow storms, etc. cause all sorts of problems. Just think how much that will be effecting things with more and more things being networked for TV via satelites (and especially in digital form).

I've already been seeing all kinds of blocky glitches, pauses, jerks, and stuttering on several of my cable channels when viewed on a TV connected directly to the cable line (no converter boxes or anything else involved).

Dispite what many people would like to believe, digital just is NOT better than analog (and very likely never will be).

Things are only going to get worse as we move on into the digital TV era. It's nice to try and learn how it all works and correct things if possible, but in the long run the signal you get is going to be so royally screwed up that you won't be able to correct it anyway.

That's why I had said just sit back and enjoy watching TV (while it's still tolerable to even watch it). Things ARE going to get much worse

[kny3twalker]

WOW how negative
personally I disagree and think that digital well HDTTV is going to be much better
I already think Digital satelite is better than analogue cable

never had HDTV service or antenna

[jimbobuk]

Thats a bleak picture mls

I know what you mean... had digital satelite for about 4 years now, and had normal satelite a bit before then.. to be honest digital is better with regards to surviving external problems like storms etc.. in fact its very very rare that i see any problems on our satelite feeds.. we used to get problems with the analogue setup..

One thing of course that digital is better than analogue for is tolerance of noise.. thats one of the points of it... the problem being that where as analogue struggles gracefully under pressure, digital will be solid as a rock for a lot longer (usually more than is ever expected to be a problem under most conditions) and then it just stops

This kind of image stuff does resemble the kind of ghosting, interference that analogue systems are plagued with (we still get off the air tv and its visible on that, along with the coaxial distribution of the tv around the house (especially since we got wifi and DET phones)).. to a point digital really helps with this but yeah.. bad digital (the kind that live transmission tends to need... with on the fly encoding etc) aint great..

YOu watch any kind of game show through sky digital over here and whenever a crowd shot is there with lots of flashing lights and maybe falling gliter type stuff and the picture quality is terrible.. LOADSA blocks... i try to point it out to people and most people dont see it.. I guess thats the point..

ANyways .. i will have a go with these tweaks and see where i get

[mls]

I do have even a bleaker outlook for the future of DTV (and especially HDTV), but I don't want to keep side tracking this thread with all that. For those that might be interested in my other thoughts and opinions in that regard, let me know and I'll PM you and we can continue those discussions on the side.

OK, so getting back on track here...

I find it rather interesting that even though (if I understood correctly) that you're working with PAL, yet at the same time seeing very similar side effects that occur with NTSC's interlacing and 3:2 pulldown.

Having never seen a true PAL signal, I really would not know if it looks any better than NTSC or not. However, I do recall (many years ago) reading that some people from England that came over to the states often complained about how our TV seem to flicker compared to theirs.

Having had a dual monitor set up for a long time, and with one old monitor only being able to run at 640 x 480 fixed at 60 cycle scan.... I have noticed that after a long period of time staring at one screen typing e-mail or what ever, and then looking over at the other (running a different scan rate) that I do see a flickering effect for maybe 10 seconds or so until my eyes adjust.

What I'm getting to here is that I think people do become accustomed to what they see after a while. Then, when the see something else it doesn't look quite right.

I have a friend that doesn't seem to notice any of the blockiness or jaggies that I do (and have learned to ignore) even when I point them out to him in certain scenes. Only time he notices them is if I actually can freeze frame and step one frame at a time.

This brings us back to "the average person" really is not noticing a lot of the things we are discussing here. I'm glad I'm not the only one "seeing things" and appreciate having found a forum section were others are more open to discussing things like this.

[kny3twalker]

well hopefully now that pci express is around and there should be motherboards out soon that can support two pci express graphics cards hopefully allowing one for each monitor

[mls]

Did ya see the demo on TechTV's The Screensavers with 2 nVidia PCI Express cards... one rendering the top half, the other the bottem half with both feeding out to one monitor for faster gaming?

They didn't really say much about using 2 cards with 2 monitors though (although I'm sure that HAS to be part of the PCI Express functionality also).

[kny3twalker]

yeah
but I think that alienware system was using an nvidia and an ATI pci express video cards
even more possibilities