Encoding 24p footage - field order question? Should i set to none? Canon XL2

This will be for YouTube. I shot footage on (true) 24p on a canon xl2. Captured in in Premiere in a 29.97 project and removed the pulldown. I'm confused about the field order settings in media encoder. Should this setting be set to 'None' (off)?

Yes, encode to progressive.

Similar Messages

Field order question

I have some footage from two camera's I need to do a multicam cut on. The first cam recorded SD DV (lower field first). The second cam recorded MPG 60i which is upper field first. How should I edit this for best quality?
Thanks
Ben

I do not think it will matter much which field you choose but make sure
you reverse the field of the other footage.
Also check if Encore is set to the same field if encoding in Encore.

Field Order/Dominance question

I've been noticing that spots I've produced that air on my local cable network appear to be having problems with jerky movement of elements created in Motion. I thought that maybe the field order was set wrong on my Motion projects. (I should add that I'm doing "the big no-no" by only monitoring these on my computer and not on a TV monitor. I know, I'll have to remedy that someday.) Anyway, I'm using the "NTSC Broadcast SD" preset and that means field order is lower/even. I'm definitely rendering these out with field rendering on (Apple ProRes, btw) as I can see the interlace combing when viewing the output file.
I thought I'd try an experiment by creating a Motion project that would expose interlacing problems in the worst way and then render it out of Motion three ways: lower, upper and none. I then encoded these to mpeg-2 using Squeeze and burned them to a DVD (in DVDSP) to view on my consumer DVD player and SD television. (Remember, that's the only way I can view them played back interlaced...) To my surprise both the upper and lower movies looked terrible and the one rendered with no field dominance looked the best.
What gives? Any ideas? Does this seem right?
Thanks!
--Kurt Cowling

Wow Iain, you know waaaay more about this than I do. In fact, I asked a question in the iDVD area of this board many moons ago regarding whether or not there was some sort of metadata or tag that let iDVD know if the incoming file was interlaced or progressive and the response was basically "I don't know for sure, but I don't think so".
Anyway, I can confirm what you say regarding the output of ProRes files. The content is interlaced, but when clicking the deinterlace button in the advanced area of QuickTime player nothing happens.
I tried as you suggested and opened the "Advanced..." area of the output settings in Motion and found that interlace was indeed not checked in the ProRes settings. When I output a file after checking that box I can also confirm that the deinterlace button in QT player did actually deinterlace the display of the file.
I normally output my Motion projects in several layers and bring them back into FCP (as rendered video, not Motion files) to composite them with the underlying camera footage. (Makes later changes and updates easier to deal with for my workflow.) I then export the composite out of FCP as uncompressed SD and then proceed to encode for FTP delivery from there (usually H.264). I opened a recent uncompressed file that was output from FCP and found that it suffered from the same problem, namely that the file was not tagged as interlaced, even though the content was interlaced.
I then opened one of the H.264 files that was encoded from the uncompressed master. Same issue again.
The one thing I haven't tried (yet) is outputting my test project from Motion as described in my first post (but with the files tagged correctly this time!) and see if the DVD that gets burned plays correctly. I will try this in the next day or two.
I don't know what happens to my files after I FTP them to the cable provider, but I assume they must transcode them from H.264 into their system. If the files aren't tagged as interlaced then their system is probably treating them incorrectly, as well.
This brings me to the final question(s) that may solve all of this for me:
Is there a way to change just the metadata/tag in an existing QuickTime file (so that it is tagged correctly as interlaced) without having to re-render from the beginning? Also, It appears that FCP may suffer from the same issue since it obviously uses QT to export, just like Motion. If I correctly tag a file rendered from Motion and then import it into FCP and FCP doesn't then pass the correct tag on output to uncompressed I still have the same problem. Or, if FCP tags the uncompressed file correctly, but QT doesn't pass this along to the H.264, I'm still screwed. Hence, my question at the top of this paragraph! I think I really only need the last file I handle before FTPing to have the correct tag, since the content has been fine all along.
Thanks so much Iain for looking into this! I would never have found this on my own. I'm not exactly sure if this is a bug or just a bad implementation, but this seems like a bad oversight for sure and not something that could be figured out from reading the manual.
--Kurt
p.s. I will try some more experimenting with this and hopefully can come back and marked this thread as "question answered" since a workaround seems doable. Iain, would you be willing to submit this to Apple as a bug report? You seem to have a much better handle on this than I do.

Interlaced footage in secondary preview - wrong field order.

I just got CS5 Production Premium and an EVGA GTX 465, which is basically a GTX470 with less CUDA cores (352 instead of 448). I added the card to the list in the Premiere CS5 txt file (the so called hack) and everything seems to work perfect except for one thing. When I play back interlaced footage that I shot with either of my two AVCHD cameras (Canon HF100 and Panasonic AG-HMC40), the footage in the TV set (which is setup as my second monitor) will play with the fields in the right order but after a few seconds it will start playing as if it were progressive, or as if the fields were in the wrong order. Then, eventually, it will go back to play the fields in the right order, and then the wrong order, and go back and forth like that. It switches every ten or twenty seconds. This happens both when the footage is played back in the source window and in the timeline.
Thanks to the GPU acceleration, it plays smoothly always even with added effects and even with different tracks at different opacity levels (I tried three tracks, one at 25%, another at 50% and the other at 100% and it played without skipping a frame), but I don't understand why it doesn't always send the right field order. I wonder if it has anything to do with the cable that goes to the TV set, since it's DVI on the end that I connect to the video card, and HDMI on the other end. Regardless of that, I purchased the cable from Monoprice and it's a very thick, well shielded cable. The card comes with a mini HDMI output, but the cable that comes with it is not long enough to reach the TV. Still, I'm not sure that it would make a difference.
Is this happening to any of you? Could this be a problem with the card itself, with my footage, or with Premiere?
Note: I had switched the "Multi-display/mixed-GPU acceleration" to "Compatibility mode" in the Nvidia control panel and it didn't make a difference in anything related to CS5, whether it's this particular problem or anything else.

JSS1138 wrote:
We should probably just get the details, instead of speculation on what hardware is being used.
Oh, the system is pretty fast, but Premiere always took a huge toll when external preview was enabled, it was like that in CS3 and CS4 as well. But here are my system specs just in case:
AMD 1090T @3.8 Ghz (stable)
16 GB of DDR3 G.Skill RAM
Gigabyte GA-890FXA-UD5
Western Digital 1.5 Gb Black Edition (as one of the video drives, the OS drive is a standard WD)
EVGA GTX465 1 GB
So while this may not be the fastest computer in the world, it's more than fast enough for HD, with 6 cores and 16 GB of RAM.
This is something that's either wrong with Premiere's design, but maybe there's a workaround, which is what I'm trying to get to. I've been trying many things in the "Manage 3D" section of the Nvidia control panel, but nothing seems to work. VSync on or off, Triple Buffering, etc, etc, the problem is still there.
Obviously if I right click on the monitor window and instead of "Both Fields" I choose either first or second field, I get just that, but I don't see why do I have to edit interlaced video with just one field instead of both.

Compressor Saying Progressive on Upper Field Order Footage?

Hi all,
I have Upper field order 10Bit Uncompressed PAL footage in a proper timeline.
When I export it (not self contained) and open it in QuickTime or FCP, all is well.
So is it odd that when I add the file to Compressor and select it, in the Inspector the Field Order is set to Progressive? It is a drop down menu so I can select Upper, but then it asks me to save it which I chose not to do. If I add an MPEG-2 preset to it, it "auto" detects the file and says Progressive.
What's the deal? Should I simply modify the MPEG-2 preset drop down menu to Upper before I submit the batch?
Thanks,
Jason
G5 Quad 2.5Ghz, 30" Cinema HD Display, Final Cut Studio, CS2 Suite Mac OS X (10.4.9) Powerbooks, other Powermacs, iBooks, iMacs, etc...

OK, here you are,
Original footage :
Original Footage Interpretation:
Render Settings :
Output Module Settings :
Format Options :
Re-imported Footage :
Interpretation of re-imported footage :
The End and Thanks~~

DVCPRO HD 720p60 Footage. Field dominance set to "None" Should timeline ?

Hey all, I got some footage from a new client. I got it on a drive, so I wasnt the editor to pull it from the source tapes. Anyway, the clips read "None" for field dominance. I'm wondering if I should set the timeline sequence to "None" or "Lower" for proper playback. For output it will go to a BetaSp Deck or possibly back to the DVCPRO Deck. Lastly, the clients want to have DVD's made.
Any suggestions about the proper way to set up appreciated.

What you need to do is set the Easy Setup to DVCPRO HD 720p60...then make a new sequence...and use what settings it has. Or, if you have FCP 6, when you cut a clip into the timeline it will ask if you want the sequence settings to match that of the clip....click YES.
Since this is progressive footage, field dominance will be set to NONE by default.
Shane

Need to setup Premiere CS6 sequence for two file types with different field orders

I have a client who has shot video for me using two cameras, one camera was set to progressive, and the other to interlaced upper field first. I need to use both file types in the edit and have been struggling to set up the sequence to get the best look for the end product, a DVD. I have several videos to do for her that were all shot in the same way, so I need a solution!
I would appreciate help figuring out how to set up this work flow from beginning to end.
Should I convert one of the files from the beginning so they match field orders before going into a sequence? Or do I just need to do some adjusting of the files once they are in the sequence? Is it just as simple as changing the transcode settings to favor the upper field first? I'm definitely having issues once the video is transcoded in Encore and you can see a lot of jagged edges and lines especially during movement. My client isn't happy and I've tried several workarounds, but to no avail.
Here are the two file types I have:
File extension: .MOV
H.264, 1920x1080, Linear PCM, 16 bit little-endian signed integer, 48000 Hz, stereo
FPS 29.97
No Fields: Progressive Scan
File extension: .MTS (my Mac finder can't read these files, but they are read in Premiere)
Image Size: 1920 x 1080
Frame Rate: 29.97
Source Audio Format: 48000 Hz - compressed - 6 channels
Pixel Aspect Ratio: 1.0
Upper Field First
I am using Adobe Premiere CS 6.0.2
Encore 6.0.1
Media Encoder 6.0.2.81
I am running it on an iMac 27-inch, Mid 2011
with Mac OS X Lion 10.7.5
Processor 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7
Graphics AMD Radeon HD 6970M 1024 MB
I've just been setting the sequence to match the .MOV files since they look much better than the .MTS files. I've done the opposite as well, setting the sequence to match the .MTS files and it doesn't seem to help. I've also changed the field order of the files once they are in the sequence by changing the field options and have tried converting the .MTS files in the Media Encoder, but nothing I've done has worked.
Any help would be so appreciated! The client I have is a photographer, so she wasn't aware of this issue when she first shot these videos. So I have 10 videos with these issues I need to get back to her, hopefully issue free! I'm struggling as an editor because my last job I was using FCP and was working with videographers who knew what they were doing, so I've never faced such problems before. Plus I'm new to the Adobe software. Not a good combination. Please forgive me if I didn't give all the information you need. I will happily respond with whatever more information you may need to help me out!
~KTrouper

I wonder if you could do your edit ignoring any visual issues of the interlaced footage but keeping the different sources separate ( checkerboard edit Vid 1/ Vid 2 )
Lock it down then export the interlaced part of the edit as a Digital Intermediate.
Maybe Export the other source as well to the same codec. DI
Bring them back together in a New Sequence. You wold have to deal with the black spacing.

Combination HD/SD and field order

Hello all -
I have a program which combines 1080i60 and 480i video in a 1080i60 timeline. The 1080i footage was captured through a Kona LHe, upconverted from 720p30 and 480i DVCAM by the JVC deck. The SD footage was captured as uncompressed SD from Beta SP using the same Kona.
My question has to do with managing the field order for encoding to SD mepg for DVD.
When I send the sequence to compressor, the mpeg preset defaults to upper field dominance (top first). I am used to specifying SD encodes as bottom first, but left it set that way for my first test, figuring this would correspopnd to the field order oof the source. What I seem to be seeing is that only the SD clips are winding up with reversed fields. I could be wrong, and I need to check it a little more carefully, since a lot of the footage originated as progressive anyway.
However, my question is, if in fact it is only these clips, which is the best way to address this:
- change the field dominance of the SD master clips in FCP?
- apply a field reversal filter to the clips in the sequence?
- de-interlace the clips in the sequence?
- change the field dominance in my Compressor preset?
I'd be interested to find out more about how the field dominance is managed by FCP when upconverting, downconverting, and combining formats is handled when capturing, editing, and exporting. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks -
Max Average

Upon further inspection (viewing the DVD on a CRT) it looks like the fields are ok after all.I wa seeing the fields in simulator, which is normal, but the field order looks correct on the final disc.
I am noticing one very strange effect on a clip that has been slowed down, however, where the fields seem to be getting interpreted in the wrong order, resulting in a back-and-forth motion. Again thie clip is interlaced SD in an HD sequence.

What field order when editing AVCHD in SD timeline?

Hi,
I have some AVCHD 60i footage which will be output to DVD. Reading different ways of editing HD I finally decided to edit the HD footage in an SD timeline since it will never be output to anything other than SD and I then have the ability to zoom around a bit more if needed.
I know I should be editing an interlaced timeline but when I select DV NTSC I get "Lower Field First" by default, whereas I have read that AVCHD interlaced footage is Upper Field First. I do know that DV and SD are different. If I just create a 720x480 29.97 upper field first timeline will I be ok or is the final m2v output expecting one field order of the other?
I will export my final timeline as a lagarith AVI which I will then have Encore encode for me.
Thank you for your suggestions!
-Stephen

Thank you both for your input. I also thought that having a smaller scale timeline would speed up rendering of effects, but maybe I'm mistaken.
I'm exporting as Lagarith AVI because I cannot, not matter what settings I use, get a crisp image when exporting direct to m2v. I always get noticable artifacting around the edges. The AVI appears to minimize this at least a little. I am using Max Rener Quality and Render and Maximum Depth.
But without getting on a tangent on those, it sounds like it IS ok then for me to edit the AVCHD footage (upper field first) in an upper field first timeline and then export (either m2v or avi) as an upper field first file?
I'll keep working on the encoding (been working on it for 2 days) to see why the artifacting is going on.
Thank you again,
-Stephen

Field order issue with Avid codec

Is there some way of setting the field order of the source for Encore DVD 2. Given the problems I experienced with ProCoder I decided to encode a project using the inbuilt Main Concept encoder.
On the interpret footage menu I can correctly set the aspect ratio but not the field order.
Unfortunately Quicktime does not seem to be passing on the correct field order to the Main Concept encoder everytime.
I have had one encode using a preset I created that worked perfectly - I then copied that preset and added a crop and scale to get rid of some VIT (out of essential but viewable on the customers replay system) and everything was field muddled.
I can see how you can set the output field order but no way of setting the source field order. Transcoding on automatic had the same jumbled field effect.
BTW these were full Quicktimes not refs

Probably - although it is such a small re-scale, that if the scaling algorithm is even half-way decent the result should be fine. This is Digibeta originated footage.. in fact the result when I re-worked this in ProCoder was excellent.
I just wanted to avoid having to place a mask over 8 different sequences amounting to 50 minutes in length, as anything you then export would result in a full render (even though the Avid would play it in real time).
I guess I'll have to seriously look at my workflow - everything used to just work beautifully - Avid PAL codecs all UFF except for AvidDV LFF; now I keep getting a weird progressive looking result with the new Avid 1:1 10bit codec even though the source is interlaced UFF and recently I rendered an Avid DV export with all settings correct (Source LFF Target UFF) and it ended up jumbled. I had to deliberately set the source to UFF. I do think the culprit is QT 7 as all these problems seem to have started from the switchover from QT6+, but I'm not certain.

Best DV deck for capturing Panasonic 24p footage

Hi everyone,
I'm working with 24p footage from Panasonic DVX-100A and HVX-200 cameras. I've always found the tapes tricky to capture with Advanced Pulldown Removal, and now I'm unhappy with my Sony DSR-11 VTR.
I'm finding that some equipment plays nicer with 24p footage than others.
Some of my editing colleagues have suggested that I should use Panasonic equipment - and they do have an equivalent low-end DV deck, the AG-DV2500.
Any suggestions from the field? My budget does not permit buying a full-blown studio DVCam machine, unfortunately.
Joe

I put this question to Larry Jordan, of newsletter fame, and he feels that I'll be better off with a Panasonic VTR - so I'm gonna give that a try.

24p footage shown as 29.97 in DVD Studio Pro

Hello,
I shot footage in DVCPRO HD codec with the HVX200 camera using the 24pN (native) recording format.
I edit everything in FCP 5 and when exporting to Compressor using the output DVD 90min best quality 16:9 everything is still OK. The video file (when opened in QT) shows that it's a 23.97 fps file as it should be.
BUT after importing it as asset in DVD Studio Pro 4, it shows as 29.97!! WHY? The video is smooth though, but why does it not show as 24p footage?
PS: everything is in NTSC (camera, FCP, DVD Studio Pro)
Thanks for any quick help,
JERRY.

Do not know if you have DVD Demystified, but page 9-34 says what you are saying. (Wanted to double check to make sure I said it right and I was starting to get a bit lost here also. Too late at night LOL )
DVD-Video supports 525/60 (NTSC 29.97 interlaced fps) and 625/50 (PAL/SECAM 25 interlaced fps) In the case of 24 fps the MPEG Encoder adds repeat first field flags to perform 2-3 pulldown fo 60 displays, for PAL a 4% increase in speed.
Also this thread from awhile back
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=3944958

Motion and Field Order Stupidness

I'll try not to rant too much.
But what is up with Motion and working with DV NTSC video with fields? I have had nothing but headaches. I am a long time After Effects user, and I was glad to get Motion 2 (2.1.2), but I've just spent the last hour and half trying to get it to render DV NTSC video correctly without it getting field jitter on a project that needed to be over-nighted to go on the air. And it still doesn't look totally correct. (I'm not a happy camper)
Here's the deal, I took DV captured footage from FCP using the standard DV/DVCPRO - NTSC preset I've used forever. That footage was imported into a Motion project that was using its own NTSC DV project preset (all lower fields -even). But every time I'd play it back in Motion, or render it out (still using the NTSC DV render preset), I get serious field jitter on DV output.
Eventually I found under the Inspector-Media tabs that the footage was imported as Field Order- None (why I have not a clue). So I changed all the footage to Lower (even). That worked on any footage where size, rotation, or position was not changed. If any of those attributes was changed I get the field order jitter. It seems to me that Motion is not able to render out field ordered video properly and the quality looks poor or jittery.
Now that might seem hasty to say that, but I've been doing the same thing in AE for years, never having to change the imported field order to get it to look right and I have always captured, imported, work with projects and rendered using the QT DV/DVCPRO - NTSC presets.
Can someone help me because I can not believe I've had to change so many setting to try to get video to look right from Motion while using the same settings during the entire workflow.
Thanks, and sorry for the rant.
PowerMac Dual 2.0 G5, PowerMac Dual 1.42 G4, iBook 800 G3, Mac mini 1.42 G4 Mac OS X (10.4.7)

Hey, thanks for the replys.
[....you might want to try using the animation codec..millions of colors...]
I gave that a shot this morning, and I'm having the same problem. See what's going on now is after changing the Field Order to even for the footage media, all of it looks decent except for the ones on an angle, croped or resized and I see this in both Motion's preview and the final render when I play it back in FCP. So as per your suggestion I rendered with the animation codec (filed rendering) and it still has it. Its just odd to me that it does that, like I said before I've worked in the DV/DVCPRO - NTSC codec with FCP and AE for years with no quality degrade. The reason I have always do that is that's what I capture to and that what my FCP project is so to keep it all consistant. BTW, this is going network and cable, no different than I usually do.
[...are you enabling field rendering in the Canvas or in the export settings?]
Yes I am, sorry, I should have pointed that out. I have done combinations of different QT codecs with and without field rendering turned on to see different results. None of course resolves this issue.
Thanks
PowerMac Dual 2.0 G5, PowerMac Dual 1.42 G4, iBook 800 G3, Mac mini 1.42 G4 Mac OS X (10.4.7)

XML Parsing attributes with encoded ampersand causes wrong order

Hi all,
I am writing in the forum first (because it could be that i am doing something wrong.... but i think it is a bug. Nonetheless, i thought i'd write my problem up here first.
I am using Java 6, and this has been reproduced on both windows and linux.
java version "1.6.0_03"
Problem:
read XML file into org.w3c.dom.Document.
XML File has some attributes which contain ampersand. These are escaped as (i think) is prescribed by the rule of XML. For example:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
     <lang>
          <text dna="8233" ro="chisturi de plex coroid (>=1.5 mm)" it="Cisti del plesso corioideo(>=1.5mm)" tr="Koroıd pleksus kisti (>=1.5 mm)" pt_br="Cisto do plexo coróide (>=1,5 mm)" de="Choroidplexus Zyste (>=1,5 mm)" el="Κύστει&sigmaf; χοροειδού&sigmaf; πλέγματο&sigmaf; (>= 1.5 mm)" zh_cn="脉络膜囊肿（>= 1.5 mm）" pt="Quisto do plexo coroideu (>=1,5 mm)" bg="Киста на хориоидния плексус (>= 1.5 mm)" fr="Kystes du plexus choroide (>= 1,5 mm)" en="Choroid plexus cysts (>=1.5 mm)" ru="кисты сосудистых сплетений (>=1.5 mm)" es="Quiste del plexo coroideo (>=1.5 mm)" ja="脈絡膜嚢胞（>=1.5mm）" nl="Plexus choroidus cyste (>= 1,5 mm)" />
</lang>As you might understand, we need to have the fixed text '>' for later processing. (not the greater than symbol '>' but the escaped version of it).
Therefore, I escape the ampersand (encode?) and leave the rest of the text as is. And so my > becomes >
All ok?
Symptom:
in fetching attributes, for example by the getAttribute("en") type call, the wrong attribute values are fetched.
Not only that, if i only read to Document instance, and write back to file, the attributes are shown mixed up.
eg:
dna: 8233, ro=chisturi de plex coroid (>=1.5 mm), en=кисты сосудистых сплетений (>=1, de=Choroidplexus Zyste (>=1,5 mm)Here you can see that 'en' is shown holding what looks like greek, ... (what is ru as a country-code anyway?) where it should have obviously had the english text that originally was associated with the attribute 'en'
This seems very strange and unexpected to me. I would have thought that in escaping (encoding) the ampersand, i have fulfilled all requirements of me, and that should be that.
There is also no error that seems to occur.... we simply get the wrong order when fetching attributes.
Am I doing something wrong? Or is this a bug that should be submitted?
Kind Regards, and thanks to all responders/readers.
Sean
p.s. previously I had not been escaping the ampersand. This meant that I lost my ampersand in fetching attributes, AND the attribute order was ALSO WRONG!
In fact, the wrong order was what led me to read about how to correctly encode ampersand at all. I had been hoping that correctly encoding would fix the order problem, but it didn't.
Edited by: svaens on Mar 31, 2008 6:21 AM

Hi kdgregory ,
Firstly, sorry if there has been a misunderstanding on my part. If i did not reply to the question you raised, I appologise.
In this 'reply' I hope not to risk further misunderstanding, and have simply given the most basic example which will cause the problem I am talking about, as well as short instructions on what XML to remove to make the problem disappear.
Secondly, as this page seems to be displayed in ISO 8859-1, this is the reason the xml I have posted looks garbled. The xml is UTF-8. I have provided a link to the example xml file for the sample below
[example xml file UTF-8|http://sean.freeshell.org/java/less2.xml]
As for your most recent questions:
Is it specified as an entity? To my knowledge (so far as my understanding of what an entity is) , yes, I am including entities in my xml. In my below example, the entities are the code for the greater than symbol. I am under the understanding that this is allowed in XML ??
Is it an actual literal character (0xA0)? No, I am specifying 'greater than' entity (code?) in order to include the actual symbol in the end result. I am encoding it in form 'ampersand', 'g character', 't character', 'colon' in order for it to work, according to information I have read on various web pages. A quick google search will show you where I got such information from, example website: https://studio.tellme.com/general/xmlprimer.html
Here is my sample program. It is longer than the one you kindly provided only because it prints out all attributes of the element it looks for. To use it, only change the name of the file it loads.
I have given the xml code seperately so it can be easily copied and saved to file.
Results you can expect from running this small test example?
1. a mixed up list of attributes where attribute node name no longer matches its assigned attribute values (not for all attributes, but some).
2. removing the attribute bg from the 'text' element will reduce most of these symptoms, but not all. Removing another attribute from the element will most likely make the end result look normal again.
3. No exception is thrown by the presence of non xml characters.
IMPORTANT!!! I have only just (unfortunately) noticed what this page does to my unicode characters... all the the international characters get turned into funny codes when previewed and viewed on this page.
Whereas the only codes I am explicitly including in this XML is the greater than symbol. The rest were international characters.
Perhaps that is the problem?
Perhaps there is an international characters problem?
I am quite sure that these characters are all UTF-8 because when I open up this xml file in firefox, It displays correctly, and in checking the character encoding, firefox reports UTF-8.
In order to provide an un-garbled xml file, I will provide it at this link:
link to xml file: [http://sean.freeshell.org/java/less2.xml]
Again, sorry for any hassle and/or delay with my reply, or poor reply. I did not mean to waste anyones time.
It will be appreciated however if an answer can be found for this problem. Chiefly,
1. Is this a bug?
2. Is the XML correct? (if not, then all those websites i've been reading are giving false information? )
Kindest Regards,
Sean
import javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory;
import org.w3c.dom.Document;
import org.w3c.dom.Element;
import org.w3c.dom.NamedNodeMap;
import org.w3c.dom.Node;
import org.w3c.dom.NodeList;
import org.xml.sax.InputSource;
public class Example
    public static void main(String[] argv)
          try
               FileInputStream fis = new FileInputStream("/home/sean/Desktop/chris/less2.xml");
             Document doc = DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance()
             .newDocumentBuilder()
             .parse(new InputSource(fis));
               Element root = doc.getDocumentElement();
               NodeList textnodes = root.getElementsByTagName("text");
               int len = textnodes.getLength();
               int index = 0;
               int attindex = 0;
               int attrlen = 0;
               NamedNodeMap attrs = null;
               while (index<len)
                    Element te = (Element)textnodes.item(index);
                    attrs = te.getAttributes();
                    attrlen = attrs.getLength();
                    attindex = 0;
                    Node node = null;
                    while (attindex<attrlen)
                         node = attrs.item(attindex);
                         System.out.println("attr: "+node.getNodeName()+ " is shown holding value: " + node.getNodeValue());
                         attindex++;
                    index++;
                    System.out.println("-------------");
             fis.close();
          catch(Exception e)
               System.out.println("we've had an exception, type "+ e);
} [example xml file|http://sean.freeshell.org/java/less2.xml]
FOR THE XML, Please see link above, as it is UTF-8, and this page is not. Edited by: svaens on Apr 7, 2008 7:03 AM
Edited by: svaens on Apr 7, 2008 7:23 AM
Edited by: svaens on Apr 7, 2008 7:37 AM
Edited by: svaens on Apr 7, 2008 7:41 AM

Re field order in INNER JOIN

Hi,
I need a suggestion for improvement of my inner JOIN statement.
internal table itab is of below type
type: begin of ty_itab
        field a
        field b
        field c
        field d
        end of ty_itab
I have to join two database table TABLE1 and TABLE2. Fields a and d are from TABLE2 and fields b and c are from TABLE 1.
But in the internal table I must have the fields in the order fielda,b,c,d.
Which of the below two options will be better for performance ? And why ?
option 1:
SELECT tab2~a
              tab1~b
              tab1~c
              tab2~d into corresponding fields of itab from TABLE1 as tab1 and TABLE2 as tab2 on..........
option2:
SELECT tab1~b
              tab1~c
              tab2~a
              tab2~d into corresponding fields of itab from TABLE1 as tab1 and TABLE2 as tab2 on..........
Thanks in advance...
Best Regards
Ananya Mukherjee
Moderator message - Cross post locked
Edited by: Rob Burbank on May 28, 2009 9:43 AM

I am not satisfied with your two options. Because of following reason,
1. First I want to know which one is master table and item table. Because in inner join select query you want to use master table as first and you want to use the item table as second.
Example:
SELECT TAB2A TAB1B TAB1C TAB2D
      INTO TABLE ITAB
    FROM <MASTER TABLE1> AS TAB1 INNER JOIN <ITEM TABLE2> AS TAB2 ON..........
2. You should not use the INTO CORRESPONDING FIELDS OF ITAB. Instead of this you can change the field order in internal table or in select query.
Example:
Use following way
TYPE: BEGIN OF TY_ITAB
                FIELD A
                FIELD B
                FIELD C
                FIELD D
           END OF TY_ITAB
SELECT TAB2A TAB1B TAB1C TAB2D
     INTO TABLE ITAB
   FROM <MASTER TABLE1> AS TAB1 INNER JOIN <ITEM TABLE2> AS TAB2 ON..........
Or , Anyway you are going to use in program only. It will not affect your logic if change the field order in the internal table.
TYPE: BEGIN OF TY_ITAB
                FIELD B
                FIELD C
                FIELD A
                FIELD D
          END OF TY_ITAB
SELECT TAB1B TAB1C TAB2A TAB2D
     INTO TABLE ITAB
   FROM <MASTER TABLE1> AS TAB1 INNER JOIN <ITEM TABLE2> AS TAB2 ON..........
3. In inner join query, the order of Where condition also create the perform issue. Because in where condition maximum you try to use all the primary key from <MASTER TABLE1> and <ITEM TABLE2> and field order in where condition should be same order in <MASTER TABLE1> and <ITEM TABLE>.
This are the things you want to take care when you try to use INNER JOIN Query. If you have any clarification please let me know. I will try answer your Questions.
Ravi.
Edited by: RavivarmanP on May 28, 2009 6:55 PM

Encoding 24p footage - field order question? Should i set to none? Canon XL2

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for