[FFmpeg-user] Objectively best deinterlacer?

Carl Eugen Hoyos cehoyos at ag.or.at
Fri Jan 24 14:02:22 CET 2014

Leo Izen <leo.izen <at> gmail.com> writes:

> On 01/22/2014 03:47 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > Leo Izen <leo.izen <at> gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> Is there any filter which is objectively best at
> >> deinterlacing? I like the results from -filter:v 'pp=fd'
> >
> > Sorry, but imo it is ridiculous to compare fd (which
> > is not a true deinterlacer) with yadif.

To elaborate: I used fd before yadif was written, but 
yadif is over seven years old, so there should be no 
reason to use fd (except for some comparison but I 
would be surprised if you get any results we don't 
know yet). Note that before yadif was written, many 
developers preferred pp=ld (I did not).

> I did not realize that all deinterlacers double the 
> framerate.

Not all do.
But assuming the interlacing was not done in the camera 
but through an interlace filter, the original frame 
rate was halved, so the best approach is to double the 
frame rate (back to the original).
Even if the recording was interlaced, to keep all 
temporal information that is available in the input 
video, you will have to double the output frame rate.
(This is completely independent from what yadif does 
by default.)

(And after more thinking: Maybe the author of w3fdif 
prefers it over yadif because he compared double 
w3fdif frame rate with half yadif frame rate but this 
is only evil guessing, I did not test myself.)

> Using yadif, what output framerate options would I 
> use to deinterlace 60i input (actually 59.94, but 
> whatever)?

This depends on your use case.

> Would I add "-r 29.97" or should I let it use its 
> default of 59.94?

Please don't, set the yadif mode depending on what 
output frame rate you want.

Carl Eugen

More information about the ffmpeg-user mailing list