dv codec comparison page?

[BrianP]

There was a link several months ago to a page that had comparisons of the Canopus, MainConcept, and MS DV codecs. I can't find it (are all threads >1 month old now gone??) so can someone repost it?

[KuroNeko]

www.slashcam.de has a lot of info on codecs, the errors they produce etc.

The article you refer to may be this one:

http://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Grundlagen/Der_Canopus_-_Unterschied.html

However, all these pages are in German, so I'm not sure this is what you are looking for

Neko

[hippie91]

where can i get a different codec besides the m$ one?

(i know it's @#$^)

[Dr Mordrid]

You can get MainConcept's DV codec for about $50 USD.

http://www.mainconcept.com/products.shtml

Dr. Mordrid

[Ted222]

Say, Doc,
Have you experienced any difference in quality using different DV codecs?
thanks,
Ted

[BrianP]

Can someone explain just what the Main Concept codec does?

I know what it is supposed to do--be a replacement for the MS codec. But I ask because I read the feature on abcdv.com [http://www.abcdv.com/dvtech/replace_...dvcodec_1.html] about how to use the Main Concept codec with Premiere. The workaround allows you to edit with the codec instead of the MS one. Well, if somebody didn't use that trick, what the heck good would the codec be? Isn't that what the codec is for: rendering the transitions and composits?

[Dr Mordrid]

Who's editing with Premiere? :-)

Yes, you do have to go through hoops to use alternate DV codecs with Premiere. Not so with MSPro 6.5.

MC's advantages are;

1. higher quality when compositing or with multiple generations of recompression. Less artifacting than MSDV.

2. better color fidelity when compositing or in multiple generations of recompression. MSDV goes green.

3. slightly faster.

4. MSDV is a DirectShow filter and thus cannot be seen/used in VfW programs. MC can be recognized/used by programs that only support the VfW interface. MSPro 6.5 directly suports alternate DV codecs set up in this manner; Premiere doesn't. Score a big one for Ulead.

YES, there are big differences...particularly in compositing effects and titles. Also; the more generations of recompression the more important it is to use something other than MSDV.

Where does recompression come in? It comes in when you go to add things in preproduction before a main edit occurs.

An example would be running DV footage through VideoPaint then including the result in a DV project that will have another effect overlaid on that footage. Adding filters, titles etc. to also it adds another generation of recompression. Even a few such recompressions would bring out the worst in MSDV.

Other software DV codecs provide even higher quality vs MSDV.

The Matrox DV codec used in the RT-2x00 cards is a great example and they include a version that can be installed on systems without the RT hardware. This allows editing RT-2x00 compatable files on any other systems you have along with the option to export in DV50 (4:2:2 DV). This can't be exported to normal DV devices, but can be sent to a DVCPRO50 deck/cam for later use by a service agency.

The Canopus DV codec also delivers higher quality, but I don't think it can do DV50 nor do I think can it be installed on satellite systems.

I rwish Matrox would sell their DV codec as a competitor for MC. It really is that good.

Dr. Mordrid

[Elie]

The Canopus Codec isn't all that great, it apears to have excesive contrast creating a slightly over saturated image.

I will find a link to the review and post it here.

Regards,
Elie

[BrianP]

I think I found the link to the comparision page (the MURC search feature now miraculously appears to be functioning again).

Unfortunately the link and the site are now dead:

http://members.home.net/dgcom/MiniDV/DVcompressors.htm

Anyone know where dgcom's site might have moved to?

[johnpr98]

I asked Dmitri to update the page a long time ago, as it was based on the Pre-DX8 MS codec.

It looks like he has now moved on to better things.

The difference showed in multiple test renderings, it wasn't so apparent in normal use, especially in PAL land.

My 2c worth.

John

http://www.johnpr98.com

[Jerry Jones]

In fact, the big ADVANTAGE of the Microsoft DV codec is that it functions in a Direct Show environment...

...which *is* state-of-the-art technology...

...with PRACTICALLY NO FILE SIZE LIMITATIONS.

If you routinely produce DVDs, you'll know how important that is.

For my personal needs, the Microsoft DV codec is good enough.

I much prefer to work on my home systems with OHCI / Direct Show support than on my office system with Canopus and the old Video-for-Windows technology. The headaches associated with file size limitations are real... in spite of the clumsy workarounds.

The older codecs that function in the Video-for-Windows world are obsolete in this regard.

In my opinion, applications that do *not* work in a Direct Show environment are obsolete.

I'm am happy to report that ARTEL SOFTWARE is going to soon release an update to BORIS FX that will support Type 1 DV in a DIRECT SHOW environment *as movies*!!

Watch for details of this new Boris release in the next few weeks.

This move by Boris - in my opinion - demonstrates they are serious about keeping up with technology and improving their Direct Show functionality for compositing.

Adam Wilt has done some decent DV codec testing and he stated the following about Microsoft's DV codec:

"With DirectX8 the Microsoft codec quality improved markedly; it's now as good as the original RadDV codec was in its day (which means that by modern standards it's towards the top of the bottom half of the class)."

"Usable, if not great."

Microsoft is said to be close to releasing the next version of DirectX and the codec improvements are said to be significant.

When that happens, compositing applications that support Direct Show will have an upper hand.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Dr Mordrid]

IF Dx9 comes out with a markedly improved DV codec then that'll be a boon to those of us with higher expectations.

For now I'm putting the RT-2x00 DV codec on my machines for because it also does DV50 (4:2:2 colorspace & 2x the bitrate)

Dr. Mordrid

[BrianP]

Found this page:

http://www.onerivermedia.com/codecs/

Not quite what I originally was looking for, but interesting nonetheless.

[Ted222]

Doc,

What hardware do you use to take advantage of the "DV50 (4:2:2 colorspace & 2x the bitrate)" ??

I have an RT2500 and am using the default DV settings currently.

thanks,

Ted

Oh, never mind, I read your total response and see that it just has potential and not really any practical use for most of us...

Sorry......