A Camera Problem im having when video taping.

[King Goldfish]

Both my older single CCD and newer 3CCD vid files will show weird horizontal lines when editing . actually the raw vids do it too but some compressions seem worst. Im guessing this is the Resolution Lines?


My older panasonic has 500 resolutional lines and my newer camera has 540.

I notice its almost invisable when the camera is completely still, but if I jerk it or if something moves across a scene real fast (Like a car) or my kids are being goofy and moving all over, then the lines around their bodys or any other object moving fast gets pulled like taffy. almost a wavey effect.

What am I doing wrong, or is this normal? What is this called? is there a technical name for it.

Most importantly, How can I fix it without buying a 4000 dollar camera?

 

[Zensteve]

What do you use to edit with, first off.

You say two diff cameras show the same effect in editing. Did the older camera do this when used alone? Does the newer camera do this when used alone? Or is this only happening when trying to edit the footage from the two cameras together?

A question about this, too...

actually the raw vids do it too but some compressions seem worst

Assuming when you refer to "compressions" that you are talking about an export of final vid (not editing in it)... Are you sure your initial project settings match the imported video?

 

[King Goldfish]

Ill take some snaps of the frames to show you what I mean.


it did it in Premier, It does it in Vegas and in Movie Maker.


Im not mixing the cameras. Im just saying that either camera I use and if I move the camera or if an object like a car passes in the background, I have these weird black lines. Im guessing its because the cameras are low end and have lower amounts of lines of resolution (I notices the higher end ones have about 650-800

But i will capture a frame to show you

 

[scottspears]

I'd try digitizing the footage on another computer. It could be something with your computer. Just a thought.

Scott

 

[King Goldfish]

Wow really? I mean its a P4 2.5ghz with a Gig of DDR and a NVIDEA graphics card (I dont know if that helps)


hmm. Everything else i have is slower. alot slower. I have a P3 800mhz and a celeron 2.5ghz i picked up for my kids.


So thats not normal scott? I will try and take frame captures now to illustrate.

 

[King Goldfish]

OK.. resizing had a small effect but still the lines are clearly visable even from the camera lcd monitor. This is the 3Color Chip 540lines of resolution. the older cam does the same thing too.


here is me standing still.

Moving hands, making motion.. notice the horizontal lines

Moving and jarring the camera/tripod around

same video.. but different frame with me in uncompression and changed the monitor display to 800x600 ( from the 1024x768) and lowered color to 16bit

I also played with the hardware acceleration and nothing helped. Its on full now as it was before.

The first 3 were a Mpeg2 for DVD in vegas

i get this effect on my large screen analog and my smaller 32 inch HDTV

 

[Zensteve]

Do you see this when playing direct from camera to TV?

Are you exporting interlaced, with an upper or lower field switched off?

Do you see these things while in edit-mode, before the export?

Are you using the appropriate pixel aspect ratio?

Have you set keyframes really far apart?

 

[King Goldfish]

Do you see this when playing direct from camera to TV?

Are you exporting interlaced, with an upper or lower field switched off?

Do you see these things while in edit-mode, before the export?

Are you using the appropriate pixel aspect ratio?

Have you set keyframes really far apart?

Let me check all of this out.

Im embarassed but I dont exactly know what interlaced refers to. I've seen the term before and options for it.

Im doing this in Vegas 4. Im importing the video using a firewire to my computer. I guess its called a 1394?

does that help? When it imports I dont see the lines much on the monitor screen but then again the maximum it can be set for is 320x240 (So you can view the menu) but it says "Viewable 320x240 and video size 720x480. they just have it set to preview at 320 so you can work around it without having to minumize it.

anyways let me test this on my tv using the RCA out.

be right back.

 

[King Goldfish]

OK.. on Vegas I dont see an Interlace option. But this is what I did see, and to answer the questions

1"Do you see this when playing direct from camera to TV? "

No, Its not on my tv from the AV/RCA output. so its not the camera then.

2"Are you exporting interlaced, with an upper or lower field switched off?"

I dont see the interlace option in Vegas. What I do see however is this when setting up video option. Im using the NTSC DV Video Format. Video setting quality default is set to Good, I set it to best. It has

Something called "Field of Order" which has 2 of the things you mentioned but not "Interlace" It defaults to setting "Lower Field First" and has a drop menu to change it to "Upper Field First" or "None (Progressive Scan) I tried the None Progressive Scan and it seemed to help alot. Is that the same as Interlaced? And why is the NTSC DV format mixed with the codecs? is it in a sense a codec? I know its the American and Canadian standard but is the NTSC a vodec and or should I leave the Codec alone?

3 "Do you see these things while in edit-mode, before the export?:"

Im not sure exactly what you mean by this part. I dont see it on the LCD screen on the video camera while playback mode. But then again its only 2.5 inches diameter. its also LCD unlike my TV screens.

When using the 1394 firewire import and I see the video coming in on the Capture screen in Vegas Video I can sort of see the lines depending if its small or large screen. But That has nothing to do with the rendering feature does it? anyways I saw it on the TV after making a DVD disk. But not while running it raw feed into the TV

4 "Are you using the appropriate pixel aspect ratio?"

720x480 is the default. I guess thats it.

5 "Have you set keyframes really far apart?"

I dont even know where to adjust that part. is that the start and stop point you create before rendering? How does this affect the video lines? and what should the set value be if any?

Thanks for you help guys.

 

[indietalk]

Is this the same camera that caught the UFO Maybe that was the moon.

 

[Shaw]

Yes interlaced is the same thing as non-progressive scan . What may have been happening (I've never seen it but then I don't use Vegas) is that your editor was blending both fields (much the same idea as deinterlacing by combining fields) together so whenever motion occured you would get a ghosting effect as both fields are not aquired at the same point in time.

 

[Zensteve]

The pixel aspect ratio is different from project size. There are square pixels (1.0) and rectangle pixels (0.9). Check that you have rectangle set.

Have you tried exporting back to the camera in DV format, and seeing what the finished thing looks like on tv from there? If that is fine, it might just be the settings you are using when exporting to mpeg2 for the dvd.

 

[King Goldfish]

The pixel aspect ratio is different from project size. There are square pixels (1.0) and rectangle pixels (0.9). Check that you have rectangle set.

Have you tried exporting back to the camera in DV format, and seeing what the finished thing looks like on tv from there? If that is fine, it might just be the settings you are using when exporting to mpeg2 for the dvd.

It's set to .909 as default. so thats rectangle?