Max et les ferrailleurs (1971) TWR

From: CHYRON (DSMITHHFX) 9 Jul 2021 13:11
To: william (WILLIAMA) 21 of 25
How does it handle adding the additional video frames -- are there little 'blips' in the footage, or is it perfectly smooth?
From: william (WILLIAMA) 9 Jul 2021 13:12
Some people say it's not great as a muxer/demuxer (and it's certainly slower that, say, mkvtoolnix) but I've never had any problems.

For a stand alone program, it has an astonishing number of keys, flags, commands and variations on input syntax. Which is why it can be a bugger to use. But it is awesome.
From: william (WILLIAMA) 9 Jul 2021 13:14
It doesn't add any. The video simply runs at a different speed. That why I had a problem with subtitles from a DVD version of the film (25FPS) and a blu ray video version at 24FPS. The subtitles slowly got ahead of the video until at the end they were a full 4 minutes out.
From: CHYRON (DSMITHHFX) 9 Jul 2021 13:37
To: william (WILLIAMA) 24 of 25
So it's running slightly faster, not enough to notice?
From: william (WILLIAMA) 9 Jul 2021 14:11
Exactly. The only way you'd notice would be to run my copy and the original (unaltered) version side by side. I haven't tried it, but i reckon you'd see them going out of sync with each other quite quickly, say after 30 seconds. But if you watched one after the other they'd appear identical. Imagine a fairly substantial piece of action, say, somebody enters a bar, buys a drink and sits at a table. The scene takes half a minute. You're never going to notice a 1 second(ish) difference spread over that entire scene.

It only happened because the original movie Les choses de la vie was shot on film at 24FPS and the PAL DVD was encoded at 25FPS (which, incidentally is because the PAL TV standard was developed to match the 50Hz power supply common in Europe. In the US it was 30FPS to match 60Hz power, but colour TV meant they ended up with 29.97FPS, which is a long story). In the US and other places that use NTSC, the difference between film at 24FPS and NTSC at 29.97 is too great to simply speed up the playback, so they do have to add in images, but these images (fields as opposed to frames, because the video is interlaced) are added to slow the FPS down to 23.976 (don't ask).