Dolby Digital and editing software

[Jerry Jones]

Please answer the following question with a "YES" or "NO" answer.

If DVD is the distribution medium, is MPEG-2 compression applied to DV .avi source files?

Yes or no?

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

Please answer the following question:

Which method preserves the best quality?

a. converting a DV .avi title created by CG Infinity to MPEG-2?

...or...

b. rendering a CG Infinity title directly to MPEG-2?

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

Please answer the following question with a "YES" or "NO" answer.

If Ulead Smart Render technology does not re-encode segments of MPEG-2 video that are *untouched* by titles, transitions, or filters, does the untouched MPEG-2 video undergo any quality loss when burned to DVD?

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

Please answer the following question:

Which method preserves the best quality?

a. re-encoding a DV .avi file to be MPEG-2 for DVD distribution using the following settings:

NTSC drop frame (29.97 fps)
MPEG files
24 Bits, 720 x 480, 29.97 fps
Field Order A
(DVD-NTSC), 4:3
Video data rate: Variable (Max. 8264 kbps)
LPCM Audio, 48 KHz, Stereo

...or...

b. using source MPEG-2 files with the following properties:

NTSC drop frame (29.97 fps)
MPEG files
24 Bits, 704 x 480, 29.97 fps
Field Order B
(DVD-NTSC), 4 : 3
Video data rate: Variable (8800 kbps)
Audio data rate: 256 kbps
MPEG audio layer 2, 48 KHz, Stereo

...and burning these files to DVD using Ulead Smart Render technology?

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

In addition to the points already made, I would point out there are many different FLAVORS of MPEG-2 - a fact that seems to be ignored in conversations such as this one.

From Pinnacle:

"The first iteration of the HD spec, called Main Level at High Profile, is operating in the 4:2:0 color space, and has a refresh rate of 30P."

"Pinnacle also told Digital Media Net it also plans to offer the advanced level of the HD specification, called High Level at High Profile, a 4:2:2 protocol that's widely seen as a professional-level production codec."

"Compared to the 19mbit/sec. data rate of the Main Level codec used in JVC's JY-HD10U HDV camcorder, this next level can run at anything up to 100mbit/sec."

"It's this codec that many think will represent a breakthrough in lower-cost HD production for professional applications."

http://www.dtvprofessional.com/2004/03_mar/features/yzfccmh6.htm

In conclusion, I don't agree that MPEG-2 can be generalized as "for distribution only."

In fact, the television station where I worked for years is using a high-end MPEG-2 NLE from Pinnacle called Liquid Silver.

http://www.pinnaclesys.com/ProductPage.asp?Product_ID=492&Langue_ID=7#1

"Pinnacle Liquid Silver is the editing solution that brought together broadcast quality and non-linear editing to make online-caliber finishing a desktop reality."

"Today’s Pinnacle Liquid Silver continues to set the standard for powerful, cost-effective MPEG-2 non-linear editing."

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Patrick]

1... 2... 3... 4... 5........

Please answer the following question with a "YES" or "NO" answer.

Is there truly a valid reason for posting five times in quick succession rather than posting once?

[Jerry Jones]

Patrick,

Yes.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Brian Ellis]

Patrick

Yes, because some people cannot bear to admit they talk codswallop.

Jerry

Please re-read post #3 in this thread. This is a practical demonstration that anyone can do that proves, in no uncertain way, that editing, using MSP 7, gives better results by editing entirely in DV avi format and converting to MPEG-2 at the end, compared with editing throughout in MPEG-2. This used the latest MC encoder, which is superb.

And please don't post-whore like that, it only loses you credibility.

Best regards,

[Jerry Jones]

Brian,

You indicated in your post #3 you "used the same settings" to render your edited MPEG-2 that you used to capture your original source MPEG-2 video.

That alone may have been the first mistake in your workflow!

The fundamental disagreement in this thread hinges on whether MPEG-2 editing can be used at all in a serious way - ever - in any circumstance.

Yes - I contend there are certain circumstances under which MPEG-2 editing makes more sense than DV .avi editing.

I also contend there are certain circumstances where DV .avi editing makes more sense from a quality standpoint.

You and Patrick seem to have suggested that MPEG-2 editing should ***NEVER*** be considered for ***ANY*** type of video work.

In my opinion, that point of view is an overly simplistic and broad GENERALIZATION.

Obviously, the Pinnacle Liquid Silver product is utilized by professionals on a daily basis to edit MPEG-2 video for broadcast video production.

Are you disputing that obvious FACT?

If so, I would suggest you have a look at the FAQ for Liquid Silver on the Web page at the following link:

http://www.pinnaclesys.com/ProductPage.asp?Product_ID=492&Langue_ID=7

Second, allow me to challenge your obvious bias against the DVD disc camcorders.

First of all, I happen to own one and I can state for a fact that the image quality of the MPEG-2 video recorded by the Panasonic VDR-M30 is quite good in comparison to the image quality of DV video recorded by single-chip DV camcorders.

Second, I can provide you an example of a real world work situation where MPEG-2 shooting and editing makes more sense than DV .avi editing.

Suppose you work for a large government agency that employs two or three dozen civil engineers.

Let's say those engineers will all assemble in an auditorium to attend a lecture on project management.

The lecture will be presented by an expert in the field - a consultant who your organization has paid to deliver the lecture.

Your supervisor tells you "Brian, I don't want you spending a lot of time on this."

Your supervisor also tells you "Brian, I want you to burn this lecture to a DVD disc - without a lot of fancy titling or time-consuming compositing."

Let's assume you have two camcorders available:

1. a single-chip DV camcorder;

2. a single-chip DVD disc camcorder.

In this particular situation, I would contend that the DVD disc camcorder makes far more sense.

Not much editing would be required for this type of assignment.

Remember - all they want is a quick DVD copy of the lecture!

The only editing required would be minor:

Trim out some inconsequential comments made by the individual who introduced the lecture guest and some portions of video recorded during periods when the group decided to take rest breaks.

Let's assume your video editing workstation has lots of hard disk space, but you're already working on an edit-intensive DV project and you can't afford to free enough hard disk space for the hour long lecture.

I submit to you that this is where the DVD disc camcorders can provide a very valuable service.

The MPEG-2 video recorded by the DVD disc camcorders is recorded directly to mini DVD discs.

The DVD-VR capture plug-in in Ulead software can be utilized to "capture" the MPEG-2 from the mini DVD discs and the video can be stitched together in Ulead MediaStudio Pro 7.0's timeline - with no visual quality loss because - in this circumstance - the edits would be CUTS-ONLY.

Using the DVD disc camcorder, your hard disk consumption would be vastly reduced in comparison to the hard disk consumption required by a DV .avi edit project.

Thanks to Ulead Smart Render technology, your MPEG-2 video would not lose any visual quality when burned to the final disc that would be viewed - internally - by civil engineers.

I can assure you the visual quality of such a project would not suffer from the use of a DVD disc camcorder and MPEG-2 recording.

I have run into many such real-world work situations where MPEG-2 recording makes more sense than DV .avi editing.

I foresee the day when MPEG-4 recording and editing might work even better for such projects.

As for credibility, I feel your post seemed to betray a certain ignorance about how to maximize the quality of a given MPEG-2 editing project using Ulead MediaStudio Pro 7.0.

In addition, your own post seemed to betray a certain level of ignorance about the types of assignments tackled by videographers who work in "real world" corporate and government environments.

Challenge my credibility all you wish, but please realize my experience in goverment and in broadcasting spans decades and I can tell you with confidence that your dismissal of MPEG-2 as a valid editing format is - in fact - not credible.

Let's take your post as an example:

First, if one's project calls for video filters - then MPEG-2 editing isn't the best choice when using Ulead MediaStudio Pro 7.0.

Second, if one only has access to a DV camcorder then DV .avi editing is almost always going to be a more logical choice in Ulead MediaStudio Pro 7.0 - from a quality standpoint - than MPEG-2 editing because the DV would first have to be transcoded during capture via OHCI compliant IEEE 1394. Nevertheless, I would again point out the the original post to this thread was from an individual who contemplated use of a DVD disc camcorder and you failed to solicit any meaningful information from this individual regarding the specific nature of his project. Instead, you droned on about your own flawed experiment.

Third, you don't even have a DVD disc camcorder so you can't speak from experience where these devices are concerned.

I can.

The DVD disc camcorders make a lot of sense in many types of situations for many types of users.

Please don't trash an entire category of video acquisition devices just because they don't happen to fit your own personal circumstances.

That only loses YOU credibility.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Brian Ellis]

Jerry

Your assumptions state that not much editing would be required. I have not done a single project under those conditions. As a general rule, for 1 hour of finished proect, I need 4 - 8 hours of input video and 40 hours work with MSP7. Let's be realistic.

Then, you mix up pro MPEG2, which starts out with all I-frames, before it is compressed, and already heavily compressed stuff on a DVD-disc at, say, 0.04 Gb/min, compared with DV at 0.22 Gb/min. The fact that DVD is more heavily compressed with only every 6th to 12th frame as an I frame, should tell you something.

Then,

First, if one's project calls for video filters - then MPEG-2 editing isn't the best choice when using Ulead MediaStudio Pro 7.0.

, well, it is rare that I have a project without some filtering (usually adjustment of brightness/contrast, occasionally colour), so where does DVD leave me?

No, I don't have a DVD camera, nor do intend purchasing one. I've read too many reviews in the mags and remarks like Post #5 above from guys who have tried them. In fact, you are the only person I've corresponded with who is really enthusiastic about them.

I agree that there may be some users who can benefit from them but not serious videographers who need to edit. Incidentally, I have never imported MPEG from DV tape except experimentally during beta testing, either, for exactly the same reasons.

[Jerry Jones]

For those who may be curious, Panasonic has just released two brand new models of DVD disc camcorders:

http://www.panasonic.com/consumer_electronics/camcorder/dvdcamcorders.asp

The VDR-M50 and the VDR-M70 are the two new Panasonic models.

Hitachi has also released two new models.

The DZMV550A:

http://www.hitachi.us/tv/browse/camcorders/dvd/DZMV550A.shtml

The DZMV580A

http://www.hitachi.us/tv/browse/camcorders/dvd/DZMV580A.shtml

The DZMV580A records 16:9 aspect ratio MPEG-2 to mini DVD-RAM discs.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Patrick]

There's a niche market for almost anything

Originally posted by Jerrold Jones

You and Patrick seem to have suggested that MPEG-2 editing should ***NEVER*** be considered for ***ANY*** type of video work.

Not true. You gave a few examples of the .0005% of the people shooting video who might be interested in MPEG2 capture/edit solutions. I include myself among the rest of the 99.0095% who would rather shoot and edit with DV because of its ability to retain its superior image quality even after being captured, edited, and rendered.

Originally posted by Jerrold Jones

In fact, the television station where I worked for years is using a high-end MPEG-2 NLE from Pinnacle called Liquid Silver.

"Today’s Pinnacle Liquid Silver continues to set the standard for powerful, cost-effective MPEG-2 non-linear editing."

Jerry, I'm glad you brought up Pinnacle. This is a company that markets a wide spectrum of products. Pinnacle Studio 9 is a program that captures, edits, and outputs to tape, disc, etc. Works with any analog or digital camcorder, depending on installed hardware. Costs a grand total of $99. I know it's in a completely different league, but tell me, just out of curiousity, what is the price of Pinnacle Liquid Silver with its "cost-effective MPEG-2 non-linear editing"?

[dchip]

Although I have not tried it, right now, the only truly affordable, and effective way to do MPEG-2 editing in a full-featured NLE might be with the plugin MainConcept has developed for Adobe Premiere. Supposedly it allows frame-accurate MPEG-2 editing with no quality loss. Hopefully MainConcept will develop something like this for other NLE's.

As for myself, I still haven't found a need or reason to edit anything other than DV. Maybe someday. Here's a link to the MC product.

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

[Jerry Jones]

Actually, Ulead MediaStudio Pro 7.0 already offers frame-accurate MPEG-2 editing.

The Ulead MPEG.Now codec is based on the MainConcept SDK.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Patrick]

Yes, but...

Jerry, should I imply from your response (or lack thereof) that Pinnacle Liquid Silver is rather pricey, despite being touted as "cost-effective" for MPEG2 editing?