still image interlacing - again

Here we go again with the same old question about still images imported into FCP. i've read a lot of the postings, and wrote down eleven different responses. anyone have a definitive answer?
here's the problem: i have imported about two dozen pict files that were originally jpeg's. i converted them in PhotoShop to 720 x 480, to match my sequence settings. i am placing them over a moving background, with a drop shadow and a beveled border. (on this job, i am using a G4 450 single proc. with FCP 3.0.2. on OSX.3.9). i scale them down to about 80% of full size. i am rotating them about the Y axis (left to right) and when they get to 90 degrees (i.e., they disappear), i rotate a new picture from -90 to 0 again. i use the Basic 3D filter for this move. simple, right?
however, as the picture rotates, i get WICKED interlacing artifacts on the edges - especially apparent in my NTSC monitor, which is connected to my DSR-1500 tape deck, which is in turn connected via firewire from the mac.
i have turned on the de-interlace filter to lower field first, and also tried flicker filter>max, and anti-aliasing (all that seemed to do was make the pictures a little more blurry). i started to render one with motion blur, but the render time shot up to an unacceptable amount. after i render the move, it's still there.
the interlacing effect doesn't really show up in the canvas - but that's to be expected, since it's a computer monitor, after all.
some respondents have suggested i take it to Motion or AfterEffects. i can do that, but that's kind of a long way to go to do a simple still photo effect, isn't it? shouldn't FCP be able to do this?
btw, i have the render settings set to high. remember, this is FCP 3.
is there some secret as to filter order, or scaling it in basic motion vs. 3D motion, etc? could the drop shadow be messing things up?
also, happy holidays to everyone! maybe i should get a life and stop obsessing about this for one day of the year!?
thanks.

I'll take a stab at it.

Since you're importing the graphics at exactly the video size, anything you do as far as rotating or scaling slightly will create horrendous moire effects.

You get the same problem when you try to exactly fill a video camera view with a TV sceeen.

As a test, I would import at least one graphic at two or three times the screen size, scale it, and do the effects from there. Since the picture is in reality much bigger than the video screen, the picture pixels and the video scan lines should never, or rarely line up which is what's creating the interference.

I know exactly what to do, I just don't know the exact FCP tools to get there.

Koz

1) I would have kept these as Photoshop or TIFF format. Other formats give more artifacting.

2) Photoshop size is actually 720 X 534 for DV NTSC. Squish it in PS to 480 before importing, or circle shapes will come through squashed.

3) The most effective filter will be Gaussian Blur, a very small amount, like 1 pixel or less.

- Loren
Today's FCP 5 keytip:
Apply default Video Transition: Command-T.
Apply Default AUDIO Transition: Command-Option-T !

The FCP 5 KeyGuide?: your power placemat.
Now available at KeyGuide Central
www.neotrondesign.com

Yep Loren is right:

Gaussian blur from 0.3 to 0.6 will usually help 'jaggies' produced by too much detail on graphics/photos when displayed in SD Video.

I wouldn't go as high as 1 pixel though unless the image can handle it without getting soft everywhere.

If you have only a part of your picutre with moire patterns - it's best to mask this area on its own and apply a Gaussian blur in PS before you import into FCP this way you'll retain the sharp detail in the rest of the picture that doesn't cause problems.


As far as your 3D edges are concerned - In FCP try using Gaussian blur on the Alpha channel only (this way the blur is applied from the edges inward increasingly as you up the Gaussian Blur value) leaving the image for the most part as sharp as it was. I have used this technique at 1, 2 & 3 pixel Gaussian blur on PAL video - you'll have to see what looks best for NTSC tho...



Ben





For instant answers to more than one hundred common FCP questions, check out the LAFCPUG FAQ Wiki here : [www.lafcpug.org]

I can tell you that the scaling and rotation algorithm was not that great in the FCP 3-4.5 era. With FCP 5, you've got drastically improved scaling and rotation in your rendered effects.



Kevin Monahan
Social Support Lead, DV Products
Adobe
Adobe After Effects
Adobe Premiere Pro
Adobe After Effects and Premiere Pro Community Blog
Follow Me on Twitter!