[FFmpeg-user] Meaning of ffprobe output

Carl Eugen Hoyos ceffmpeg at gmail.com
Sun Feb 3 18:17:13 EET 2019

2019-02-03 11:58 GMT+01:00, Ulf Zibis <Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de>:
> Am 01.02.19 um 20:00 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:
>>> But for the rest of the video, I'm wondering that I nowhere notice such
>>> dropouts. IIRC I read, that the film was produced with a budget of
>>> 20.000 DM, which IMHO is not enough for a 76 min. celluloid film.
>>> Additionally in the turning camera scene from 2:34 I see comb
>>> artifacts, which are typical for interlaced video recordings (see
>>> attached extractions).

They do not look like comb artefacts as caused by interlaced
recording to me.

>> Definitely not interlaced (could be de-interlaced, but this doesn't
>> make much difference because of the other visual issues).
> Would you agree, that the original master recording probably
> was an analogue interlaced video tape, maybe early
> Betacam or high quality VHS camera

Wikipedia claims that there was neither Betacam nor VHS-C
in 1982 (I meant "Camcorder" when I wrote "Digital video"
which of course didn't exist), IMDB claims the movie was
released in January 1983.
But I agree that the lack of celluloid artefacts does point to
television cameras and recording technology.
(Although I wonder a little if these really were cheaper than
a film camera plus film.)
Wikipedia also claims that Betacam supported progressive

Carl Eugen

More information about the ffmpeg-user mailing list