Dolby Digital and editing software

[Brian Ellis]

Liquid Silver is hardly the same beast as MSP7.

First of all, it works ONLY with a $7000 HP Workstation. Yes, it will work with uncompressed MPEG (only I frames) and you can edit fine with that. It will also work with DV-25 (4.2.2) but it does not accept DV-13 (4.1.1 or 4.2.0 depending on your system), which is what most of us are using.

I maintain that ripping a DVD from a cheap camcorder, which is not I-frame only and is highly compressed, and subsequently trying to edit the results is doomed to visual catastrophe.

I agree that filming with a pro uncompressed MPEG camera and editing it in I-frame only mode with a total equipment/software cost in the $20,000 plus region will produce professional results of broadcast quality, which can then be compressed to DVD-compliant MPEG-2, if that is your desired output medium.

Starting with a compressed DVD-compliant MPEG-2 with a total equipment/software cost of <$2,000 is a horse of a totally different colour.

[Patrick]

Think I'll stick with DV

Originally posted by Brian Ellis

Liquid Silver is hardly the same beast as MSP7.

First of all, it works ONLY with a $7000 HP Workstation.

...with a total equipment/software cost in the $20,000 plus region

Brian, I now understand why Jerry wasn't too keen to respond to my inquiry about the price of Pinnacle Liquid Silver with its "cost-effective MPEG-2 non-linear editing". Yikes!

[Jerry Jones]

For those who are afraid to use DVD disc camcorders because of what you've read in this thread, fear not.

In fact, DVD disc camcorders can give you great results.

Hitachi even markets a professional level news camera that records to DVD-RAM discs:

http://www.hdal.com/products/products.ihtml?step=3&pid=1066&parent=51

Ulead MediaStudio Pro is a perfect companion for this type of camera.

One can edit the video recorded by DVD disc camcorders and - contrary to what has been suggested - one can achieve very good results.

I'm happy the two individuals who've posted contrary opinions in this thread have both finally discovered the price tag of the Pinnacle Liquid Silver product (even if that fact is entirely irrelevent).

If you have a DVD disc camcorder, and you wish instructions on how to setup a quality edit project, feel free to e-mail me at jerry@jonesgroup.net and I would be happy to assist.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Brian Ellis]

I'm sorry, Jerry, you still haven't got it.

The camera you cite is a massive pro device with one helluva lot more versatility than the <1 grand devices that this thread is all about. I don't know all the features, but it is probably capable of adjustable bitrates and I-frame only recording. The amateur ones work at a minimal bitrate.

[Patrick]

Maybe it's a bad connection...

Originally posted by Jerrold Jones

I'm happy the two individuals who've posted contrary opinions in this thread have both finally discovered the price tag of the Pinnacle Liquid Silver product (even if that fact is entirely irrelevent).

Let's see if I've got this straight - The original poster in this thread is asking about whether or not to buy a sub-$1000 camcorder. Jerry then proceeds to tout in this thread a particular editing system which is used to edit MPEG2, and now Brian and I are somehow being accused by Jerry of discussing a fact which is “entirely irrelevent” because we've exclaimed that this system is rather pricey at $20,000!!!

How relevant is mentioning a $20,000 editing system in a thread about a sub-$1000 camcorder? And one can only imagine how many zeros are in the price of the Hitachi CRD10 DVD camcorder which Jerry has also now mentioned. Of course, the actual price of this camcorder is no doubt “entirely irrelevent”.

Jerry, you haven’t changed at all over the years! You’re just too much!

[Jerry Jones]

Please compare the technical recording specifications between the professional-level Hitachi CRD10 camcorder here...

http://www.hdal.com/products/products.ihtml?step=3&pid=1066&parent=51

...and the consumer level DVD disc camcorders such as the Panasonic models here...

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

Patrick, if you would bother to do any intelligent analysis at all, then you might be willing to admit you made some misleading remarks early in this thread.

Over the years, I've grown accustomed to the immaturity in which you seem to revel, but it would be nice if you would at least acknowledge your mistake - and the fact that you made sweeping generalizations about DVD disc camcorders that betray your own lack of personal experience with these devices.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Patrick]

I didn't realize this was a forum for the broadcast TV industry

What’s the “mistake” that I made Jerry, that I don’t accept your word as the gospel truth? Sorry, but I’m too familiar with your posts over the years to do that.

My "sweeping generalizations” had to do with consumer gear, and had nothing to do with ultra expensive professional hardware/software options. Get your head out of the clouds and come down to earth.

[Jerry Jones]

For those who fear to buy consumer DVD disc camcorders, don't believe what Patrick is claiming.

You can get very good results.

Feel free to e-mail if you wish assistance.

I'm happy to help.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Brian Ellis]

Just to add a little spice to this thread, I have in front of me a review of Hitachi's latest DVD offering, the DZ-MV380 which is not a cheapo at £900. It appears in Camcorder User and DVD Movie Maker, a leading UK mag. I'd like to offer a few quotes:

DVD as a shooting format is walking a bit of a tight rope. Whilst the success of the format as a home viewing and recording medium is absolutely assured, when it comes to using the shiny discs as a capture format, opinion is somewhat divided.

The logic behind DVD camcorders is sound, but the actual realisation needs to come soon. .. DVD cams seem to be little more than work in progress.

Extra-fine mode (which can only be used with [expensive] DVD_RAM discs) uses a variable bitrate between 3 and 9 Mbit/s and allows about 18 minutes of footage per disc side. Fine and Standard modes at 6 and 3 Mbit/s respectively allow 30 and 60 minutes of footage, although the greater the capacity the greater the compression, consequently lowering the quality.

It's easy to become used to the richness and clarity of DVD movies and assume it's the something that all shiny discs share; but no, those you record yourself aren't originated on film and encoded by the finest labs the film industry can find.

The picture quality is similar to that of an entry-level mini-DV cam.... Picture and audio quality ... certainly won't impress you like a DVD movie or even a high-end mini-DV recording would.

DVD-RAM's easy to edit nature is a bonus, but the need to faff around re-recording to DVD-R for playback in a home player is not.

...the simple fact that the recording medium ... still can't [compete] on a level footing with mini-DV for quality.

All in all, this mag, which uses an independent lab for its reviews and is usually pretty fair has given unusally poor points for Ease of Use, Picture Performance, Sound performance and Value (all of these 3 stars out of 5) and somewhat better on Features (4/5). As a point of comparison, in the same issue, is a review of the latest D8, the Sony DCR-TRV255, which gets 5/5 for Ease of Use and Value, 4/5 for Features and 3/5 for Picture performance and Sound performance. However, this costs only £400, not 900. In fact, the technical performance specs, as measured by the lab, are remarkably similar, with very little difference between AM and Phase mod, S/N ratio, horizontal resolution (~440 lines) etc.

So, Jerry, please tell us all how "You can get very good results.". We would all like to hear.

[Jerry Jones]

I just took my Panasonic VDR-M30 on a trip to Yellowstone Park.

I shot video directly to DVD disc using the XTRA mode setting.

I recorded video of the spectacular Yellowstone Falls and of the Old Faithful Inn.

I even recorded some video inside the Inn using the special low light setting and the results were better than I expected.

In fact, I would say the raw video recorded directly to disc by the Panasonic VDR-M30 looks better than the video recorded by my MiniDV camcorders that has been compressed to MPEG-2 and authored using similar settings.

Brian - my experience with the DVD disc camcorders is very positive.

I'm sorry you feel it necessary to argue and argue and argue.

A little advice:

Don't take magazine articles at face value.

Do some testing yourself with a real model.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

http://www.digitalhomemag.com/reviews/default.asp?pagetypeid=2&articleid=28163&subsectionid=1303&subsubsectionid=948

"Out in the field, the highest-quality XTRA RAM mode only snags you 18 minutes a disc, but the recordings are excellent. Colour reproduction is vivid and controlled, with pictures high on detail and not far shy of the sort of performance you’d usually expect from most MiniDV cams."

In my opinion, the image quality delivered by the Xtra mode is actually *better* than inexpensive single-chip DV camcorders whose footage is compressed to MPEG-2 using identical settings.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Brian Ellis]

Originally posted by Jerrold Jones
http://www.digitalhomemag.com/review...bsectionid=948

"RAM mode only snags you 18 minutes a disc, but the recordings are excellent. ..., with pictures ... not far shy of the sort of performance you’d usually expect from most MiniDV cams."

Thanks for confirming what I've been trying to say; "not far shy" means that it is not as good as "most MiniDV cams" (not just 3-CCD ones). The fact that the measured performance under lab conditions of the relatively expensive Hitachi model is almost identical with the entry-level D8 (at under half the price) is very telling.

I'm very happy for you, if you find that DVD recording and editing is ideal for your purposes. My personal view is that editing from even the best DVD-compliant MPEG-2, encoded at 8000 Mbit/s (which exceeds the camera bitrates), is not a happy experience, no matter how carefully done. Last week, I had to do just that for a friend and the results were, well, OK, but..., and certainly no patch on doing the same in DV AVI from even the cheapest mini-DV or D8 camera.

I don't believe that it's a great idea extolling the virtues of consumer DVD cams without pointing out their vices at the same time. All I'm trying to do is to provide a balance to your unilateral eulogies by pointing out that the format does have distinct limitations.

Incidentally, I was interested to see you were using a Panasonic VDR-M30, which is rigidly identical to the Hitachi DZ-MV350. The Hitachi DZ-MV380, which was the subject of the quotes I made, is the up-market version of the same camera with a better CCD and more on-board editing features.

[Jerry Jones]

Again - you're not understanding the raw numbers associated with DVD disc camcorder MPEG encoding.

The article states "not far shy" - which only means the raw MPEG-2 is almost as good as raw DV .avi video.

As I've stated repeatedly, no current DVD players will play raw DV .avi video.

So that comparison is does not truly apply in the real world.

If you examine the raw numbers, the XTRA mode of the Panasonic VDR-M30 DVD disc camcorder records MPEG-2 video/audio with the following precise 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

Now - you have to understand that the so-called HIGH QUALITY encoding templates in ULEAD software all default to the following settings for converting DV .avi video to DVD-ready MPEG-2:

MPEG files
24 Bits, 720 x 480, 29.97 fps
(DVD-NTSC), 4:3
Video data rate: Variable (Max. 8000 kbps)
LPCM Audio, 48 KHz, Stereo

Now which do you think will yield the best quality?

Do you *really* think that DV .avi video encoded at a bitrate of 8000 kbps using the Ulead MPEG.Now codec is going to look better than video recorded directly to DVD at 8800 kbps?

If so, you are quite incorrect.

I agree that MPEG-2 recorded at the highest settings using the Panasonic VDR-M30 does not look as good as RAW DV .avi video being played directly from a DV tape.

However, the only *real* comparison that makes sense is to compare how the DVD disc camcorder video looks compared to DV format video that has been encoded to MPEG-2 and then burned to disc.

If you think that an 8000 kbps stream is going to look better than an 8800 kbps stream, then I disagree.

In fact, I'll go so far as to say that I've compared the MPEG-2 video recorded by the Panasonic VDR-M30 to DV video that has been encoded using an identical 8800 kbps setting using the Ulead MPEG.Now codec.

I can state for a fact that the DVD disc camcorder video looks better - in terms of color reproduction and in the sense that the MPEG-2 video does not exhibit the weaknesses of the DV format, i.e. stairstepping along diagonal edges, etc.

I'm afraid your comments are loaded with misinformation.

You stated below that "MPEG-2, encoded at 8000 Mbit/s...exceeds the camera bitrates."

That statement is FALSE.

The Panasonic VDR-M30 maximum bitrate is 8800 kbps, which is HIGHER than the 8000 kbps figure you cited.

You seem to be quite confused.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

Originally posted by Brian Ellis
Thanks for confirming what I've been trying to say; "not far shy" means that it is not as good as "most MiniDV cams" (not just 3-CCD ones). The fact that the measured performance under lab conditions of the relatively expensive Hitachi model is almost identical with the entry-level D8 (at under half the price) is very telling.

I'm very happy for you, if you find that DVD recording and editing is ideal for your purposes. My personal view is that editing from even the best DVD-compliant MPEG-2, encoded at 8000 Mbit/s (which exceeds the camera bitrates), is not a happy experience, no matter how carefully done. Last week, I had to do just that for a friend and the results were, well, OK, but..., and certainly no patch on doing the same in DV AVI from even the cheapest mini-DV or D8 camera.

I don't believe that it's a great idea extolling the virtues of consumer DVD cams without pointing out their vices at the same time. All I'm trying to do is to provide a balance to your unilateral eulogies by pointing out that the format does have distinct limitations.

Incidentally, I was interested to see you were using a Panasonic VDR-M30, which is rigidly identical to the Hitachi DZ-MV350. The Hitachi DZ-MV380, which was the subject of the quotes I made, is the up-market version of the same camera with a better CCD and more on-board editing features.

[Patrick]

It goes on and on and on...

Originally posted by Jerrold Jones


I'm sorry you feel it necessary to argue and argue and argue.

Please tell that to Jerry!

[Brian Ellis]

No, I'm not confused, at all.

a) Your 18 min "high quality" DVD-RAM is not recorded at 8800 kbit/s but at a variable bitrate between 3000 and 9000 kbit/s, with an average of 6000 kbit/s
b) No set-top player/TV combination (not HD), will resolve anything better than 6000 kbit/s, so the difference between 8000 and 8800 kbit/s is totally irrelevant.
c) With MSP, it is possible to encode at 8000 CBR, which is better than 8800 max, 3000 min VBR. You must not confuse apples with oranges. However, I agree that there is no visible difference between encoding at 6000 CBR and 8000 CBR.
d) Who uses the preset formats in MSP, anyway?
e) In any case, I don't use MSP for encoding, I use DVDWS2 or DVDMF3, which have better encoders.
f) The only real comparison is to take the edited footage with titles, filters, moving paths, p-in-p etc. from each source and view them on a TV. My trials (I admit not with a DVD camera as source, but an excellent quality DVD) have shown inequivocably that editing in DV AVI wins hands down.

I'm sorry, Jerry, you are skating on really thin ice.