RT.X10/100 quality - please advice

[Spielberg]

After playing several years with a Marvel G400 on a PentiumIII-800 system, I decided it's now time for the real work.
The situation is that I have a lot of footage (Video8, Hi8 and DV) that I want to turn into DVD's, where the quality of the end-result is the most important for me. I realize that my analog footage won't produce super-DVD's but at least I don't want to degrade the quality any more than necessary.

I'm planning to buy a PentiumIV-2.8GHz system with two SATA disks and a DVD-burner, and I'm now struggling with the question which video-editing card to buy.

After browsing the forum and reading some reviews my thoughts go out to a Matrox RT.X10/100, but I have a few questions for the experts on this forum.

1. How good is the analog capture of the RT.X10/100 and is there a difference between the two? Is it really much better than capturing YUY2 via the Marvel and converting this to DV with VirtualDub using MS-DV codec?

2. What about the MPEG2 output quality? The RT.X100 has hardware support for MPEG2 encoding but does this result in a better quality compared to the X.10?

3. The recommendations specify WinXP, but I prefer Win2K. Are there any issues with the RT.X10/100 and/or Adobe software under Win2K?

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Spielberg

[Dr Mordrid]

1. the analog capture quality is quite good, but the final result still depends on that of the source, your cabling and the playback device. S-Video will be better than composite, of course.

You can capture analog as RGB24, YUV or DV/DVCAM. Using software like AVI_IO you can use either RGB24 or YUV to "feed" a software codec like PICVideo or Morgan MJPEG, DIVX5, HUFFYUV etc. etc.

2. You have several MPEG output optons;

a. Premiere's embedded MainConcept MPEG-1/2 encoder. In Premiere 6.5 is very similar to MediaStudio Pro's. In Premiere Pro this is a "pro" version of MC that includes 2-pass encoding.

b. The MediaExport batch encoders Ligos MPEG-1/2 engine, which is also quite good but not quite as configurable.

c. The realtime MPEG-2 export engine. This has basic options for export, but still delivers very good quality given a good source. This engine is limited to DVD compliant MPEG-2.

d. Using a frameserver (VideoTools or PluginPac) to send the timeline to a standalone encoder like TMPGEnc or CCE.

3. I have no problem running the RT.X100 under Win2K SP2 with Premiere 6.5, but if you use Premiere Pro you have no choice but to use WinXP. Premiere PRo will not run under anything else with or without anyones card installed.

Dr. Mordrid

[Ted222]

If you are torn between the RT.x10 and the RT.x100.....they have very similar features and the same quality of final video. I have used both. The .x100 has more transitions and a much larger user database for trouble-shooting on the online formums.

Consider capturing Analog through your DV Camcorder's pass through - if its equipped with that option.

I used to use PICVideo and AVIO with my Marvel cards, but now I use the RT.x100 exclusively.

have fun,

Ted

[Brambus]

I have an RT.X100 and I'm not a professional, just an enthusiast, using my camera on holidays and so on...

imho

if you buy RT.X10 you pay the software bundle almost at full price, and if you buy the RTX.100 you will be married by someone else (Matrox) to Adobe.

Yes, my card does real time and blows new life in Premiere 6.5. This is a good thing for professionals: people who earns from weddings and so on and have a straight way to work.
From this point of view RT.X100 delivers also for the "common people", because if your machine is loaded with the usual tons of software - antivirus, internet and so on- you can pay and get your satisfaction (and be married too...)

But i think that if you really don't need that kind of Real Time because the final destination is DVD (and there is no customer ringing at the door) there are other, more creative choices waiting that should be evaluated, that rely on software for editing and rendering in Mpeg at the best.

Canopus AceDVio and Pinnacle Liquid amongst the others.
Their capture and convert quality is (at least) on par with Matrox; and you'll not be stuck with one editing system.

I love my RT.x100 but I love also HollywoodFx and Xplode.
What a pity.

Just my two cents
Brambus