This IS the Avid L2: Re: [Avid-L2] UK Production Graphics

Wednesday, September 23, 2015

Re: [Avid-L2] UK Production Graphics - interlaced or progressive?

You cannot put taste in specs.

I have a strong feeling that nice looking progressive graphics will be accepted. (Especially when they got motion blur added.)

However, I cannot concur that interlaced graphics (with motion blur) look 'clinical'.

Close to any package can render interlaced. (Although a friend claims that Mocha can't..)

If it looks good, it is good. If you see judder, it's not good. Interlace might probably help.

Bouke

VideoToolShed
van Oldenbarneveltstraat 33
6512 AS NIJMEGEN, the Netherlands
+31 24 3553311

----- Original Message -----

From: planto@gmail.com [Avid-L2]

To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 1:44 PM

Subject: [Avid-L2] UK Production Graphics - interlaced or progressive?

Hi all, hoping to clear something up re: real world use vs broadcaster requirements

According to the DPP delivery standards,

"Electronically generated moving graphics and effects (such as rollers, DVE moves, wipes, fades and

dissolves) must be generated and added as interlaced to prevent unacceptable judder."

However, a graphics dept at an unnamed large production company are insisting that interlaced graphics look too 'clinical', andexclusively supply uncompressed progressive movs, with motion blur added, bar credit rollers, which they supply as intelaced for smooth motion.

I feel like I should insist on interlaced graphics as per DPP spec, but wanted some second opinions first.

Thanks

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com