brians wig wrote:
Can you clear something up please?.
You've de-interlaced it.
Did it look like interlaced VIDEO to begin with, or had it been broadcast looking like film?
If the latter, then what you've done is fine. BUT, if it looked like a live video broadcast and you've changed that look in the deinterlacing process and it now looks like it was shot on film, then that's a massive "NO NO" to me...
The only other issue is HEVC. Whilst it's a superb codec and allows you to keep interlaced programmes interlaced with no problems (unlike .264), it's not very user-friendly for the masses.
It does look interlaced (horizontal line artifacts and whatnot) and most importantly MediaInfo reports:
Scan type: Interlaced
Scan type, store method: Separated fields
Scan order: Bottom Field First
Which I took into account to process it. It looks nicer now IMO, but there's room for improvement for sure. In any case, feel free to check it yourself and process it as you wish, if you are so inclined. It is apparent that the original file has got a number of tech issues, we should look further into it.
Regarding device support, I am aware that HEVC and FLAC are not the most friendly codecs compared to MPEG2/AC3 (ancient) or x.264/PCM (compatible with most devices today), so once again feel free to process the original file to suit your needs.