|
Post by Alex Weidmann on Feb 27, 2012 16:28:19 GMT
If there was no spot-wobble, I thought the line-structure would produce a signal at 0Hz, 573c/aph (assuming 3 lines are cropped in the film frame). In the vertical direction I pictured idealised scan-lines as square-pulses with a slight separation. The crucial thing to realise is that baseband analogue (625-line) TV, looked at as a 2D signal, is sampled vertically at 576 c/aph. So according to sampling theory it cannot contain any vertical information above a frequency of 288 c/aph (the Nyquist limit). Even if the lines are "square-pulses with a slight separation" there is no added information content. It's a bit like upconverting a sampled signal by inserting zeroes between the samples: the sample rate is increased but no information is added. You only need a sampling rate of a little over 576 c/aph to capture all the vertical information, in principle. Richard. I see your point! Though is it true to say that although any 573 c/aph signal couldn't contain any picture information, it could be useful as a metric of the vertical distortion present, and the amount of spot-wobble? Especially in film material where no chroma signal was preserved: so you cannot use the chroma frequencies to track the distortion (such as "Mind Of Evil" episode 1). What I had in mind was that film recordings have been double-sampled: first at 576i which captures the picture information, then at some higher frequency by the celluloid which captures additional information about the film recorder's topological distortions. (Having said all that, a signal at half the line-frequency should do just as well for tracking the distortion! As I recall there wasn't much energy at 288 c/aph though, only a weak signal.) Btw, if my script was found to work on an out-of-phase film insert, you would replace the Weave() statement with the following to re-create to correct field-order: AssumeBFF() DoubleWeave() SelectOdd() Trim(0, -FrameCount+1)
|
|
|
Post by Richard Russell on Feb 27, 2012 17:13:22 GMT
Though is it true to say that although any 573 c/aph signal couldn't contain any picture information, it could be useful as a metric of the vertical distortion present, and the amount of spot-wobble? I accept there is some validity in that. If the picture was a plain white raster, with no information content, the film might still capture some information from which distortion could be characterised, and that would need a higher sampling frequency. The film recording process shouldn't be sampling the signal at all. It will impose its frequency response on the channel, but there should be no sampling artefacts such as aliasing. I'm sure it wouldn't be difficult to get you some sample frames of out-of-phase film inserts, there are plenty of them! Richard.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Broad on Feb 27, 2012 18:59:46 GMT
Thought you might like to see one of my Doctor Who Colourisation Videos from The War Games. THIS IS NOT COLOUR RECOVERY I hand coloursed over 200 frames these are the results please feedback thanks www.youtube.com/watch?v=36UmXEybsiY
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Feb 27, 2012 19:06:04 GMT
Thought you might like to see one of my Doctor Who Colourisation Videos from The War Games. THIS IS NOT COLOUR RECOVERY I hand coloursed over 200 frames these are the results please feedback thanks www.youtube.com/watch?v=36UmXEybsiYIf it's not colour recovery, why did you post it in this thread, Simon?
|
|
|
Post by Simon Broad on Feb 27, 2012 19:18:43 GMT
Becuase i wanted to show you what my colourisation is like and people are going off the topic anyway on the thread anyway and plus its colourisation its not a big difffernce from colour recovery its still coloiur
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Feb 27, 2012 19:38:11 GMT
Becuase i wanted to show you what my colourisation is like and people are going off the topic anyway on the thread anyway and plus its colourisation its not a big difffernce from colour recovery its still coloiur It's a very big difference! Could you not have started a "Colourisation" thread, instead of hijacking this one..?
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 27, 2012 19:42:46 GMT
Becuase i wanted to show you what my colourisation is like and people are going off the topic anyway on the thread anyway and plus its colourisation its not a big difffernce from colour recovery its still coloiur There is a massive difference between the two and if you read the piece about POTD3 on the RT website you might realise that. Colourisation is where what can best be described as best guess colours are applied to a black and white image. Colour Recovery is where the original colours are recovered from the information accidentally captured in a black and white image.
|
|
|
Post by simonashby on Feb 27, 2012 19:57:50 GMT
people are going off the topic anyway on the thread anyway I'd say: Don't encourage this by doing it yourself.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Broad on Feb 27, 2012 20:04:27 GMT
okay why dont you lock this thread anyway after all the last one i made created enough bad influence so you might aswell do it to this thread to
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Feb 27, 2012 20:08:49 GMT
okay why dont you lock this thread anyway after all the last one i made created enough bad influence so you might aswell do it to this thread to Because we'd like to talk about the Colour Recovery software, if that's ok with you..?
|
|
|
Post by Richard Bignell on Feb 27, 2012 20:09:14 GMT
The moderators are the ones to lock threads, Simon, not forum posters. But do bear in mind that that last one was deemed to be so unwieldy that it not only ended up being locked but also deleted in its entirety.
I do have to agree though. This forum really isn't the place for hand-colourisation material. The fan artwork area of Gallifrey Base is a good place to post your material, as other people there do the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by Brad Phipps on Feb 27, 2012 21:17:35 GMT
While I agree with the arguments that some posters are making regarding the content of threads... good effort on the recolouring Simon. But as Richard said, Gallifrey Base is better for that kind of discussion than here.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Broad on Feb 27, 2012 21:40:08 GMT
Thank you Brad!
|
|
|
Post by rdenham on Feb 27, 2012 22:20:35 GMT
Does anybody know how to convert a video file into this .y format? (Ideally in a software such as After Effects)
|
|
|
Post by Simon Broad on Feb 27, 2012 22:58:38 GMT
You can't convert videos to Y file only pictures or frames plus you need a hd telerecording which most people don't have unless your richard.
|
|