| Author |
Message |
Richard Crowley
Guest
|
 Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 1:49 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"luminos" wrote ...
| Quote: | The camcorder mentioned by the OP uses USB2.
|
Many (most?) camcorders have USB (1 or 2) for transferring
still pictures. Doesn't preclude using Firewire for transfer of
full-frame full-speed video (such as DV).
We're still waiting for a list of camcorders that use USB2
for transfer of DV video. So far, the list is empty.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TigerMan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 1:55 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
great, thanks
"luminos" <logos1@trip.net> wrote in message
news:10nlja5nu5dpv33@news20.forteinc.com...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AnthonyR
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 2:04 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"nerdz_r_us" <nerdz_r_us@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:417aca4c$0$14204$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
| Quote: | Hi Bill;
I am not one of the experts here, not by a long shot. I want to get that
straight. That being said, I was just in the same situation as you. I
wanted
to get a camcorder for family oriented home movies to send back home. I
went
to several stores and asked that almighty question "which is better..
miniDV
or digital tape?"
|
Bill, just to interject here...I assume you mean miniDVD as opposed to
digital tape, right?
Because miniDV is digital tape, so that might confuse people.
miniDV (digital tape) is different from miniDVD, these companies don't make
it easy, do they?
LOL
AnthonyR. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AnthonyR
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 2:13 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"TigerMan" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
news:417acafc$0$11774$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
| Quote: | which mpeg2 editors can do that?
"luminos" <logos1@trip.net> wrote in message
news:10nli7g3eh2uf97@news20.forteinc.com...
"TigerMan" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
news:417ac6f4$0$10351$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Mini DV is better quality than MPEG2. the better quality the master is
the better and correct me if I am wrong that mini dv edits with little
or no loss. there are mpeg2 editors that retain un-edited portions. mini
dv is more precise at cutting
This is generally true, however, some of the newer Mpeg2 editors are
frame accurate: They expand and rewrite the frames of I , B, P in
software.
|
I just tried the new Main Concept MPEG PRO Plug v.1.04 in for Premiere Pro,
it's amazing!
It allows you to do frame accurate editing on all types of Mpeg files right
on the timeline, just like it's dv-avi.
But please don't confuse this with the regular, Main Concept Mpeg Plug in
encoder which is just used for encoding the final output to mpeg video from
the timeline, the 2 products are similarly named and can be confused!
It's the $250 Plug in, I am talking about, or more for the HD Version.
There is a demo on their site, it is amazing the editing ability of mpeg in
premiere pro, to bad adobe doesn't include this, maybe in the next upgrade?
Here is the link:
http://www.mainconcept.com/mpeg_pro.shtml#standard
and demo link:
http://downloads.mainconcept.com/fdl.php?downloads.mainconcept.com+MPEGProv1.0.4+mpegprov1.0.4.exe
this has changed how I think about editing in mpeg in Premiere, in fact with
this plug in you can capture directly to Premiere Pro in Mpeg2 from a dv
camcorder or a miniDVD camcorder, and edit in Mpeg2 on the timeline and it
will only render the changes with smart rendering to preserve the quality
and save much time.
Too bad it costs so much as a plug in, plus the price of Premiere pro, but I
suspect with the new Liquid Edition 6 doing native frame accurate mpeg
editing now, that this will become more common.
AnthonyR. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ed Anson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 2:35 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
AnthonyR wrote:
| Quote: | "Ed Anson" <EdAnson@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MvednYImZ_y3BOfcRVn-pA@comcast.com...
Smarty wrote:
Bill,
BTW: A miniDV tape contains a DV data stream, not avi files. If you
capture the data to a Windows computer, you will most likely store it in
an avi file. Other platforms use different file types. But you don't need
to worry about that.
Ed,
Are you positive about this? Because reading this forum for a long time, I
see many posts about this subject and most come to the consensus that when
you capture with a 1394 dv card, you aren't really capturing, more like just
transferring the already digital dv-avi signal from tape to the HD for
editing. The actual capturing encoding is done by the camera chips during
the initial recording to tape. There is no further converting done when
capturing( really transferring) to the hard drive.
But I am only going by the threads I've read on here in the past.
|
Yes, I'm positive about this. You are correct when you say that the
conversion to digital form is done in the DV camera. You are also
correct when you say that the FireWire just transfers the digital
stream. However, that doesn't mean that the data are stored as AVI files
on the tape.
A DV tape does not have a file structure as such. It simply stores a DV
data stream. AVI is one of several file types that can be used to store
the digital data. I happen to use QuickTime files. Both file types store
the same DV data, and differ only in how it is "wrapped" by the file
format. Both file types can also store different video encodings, but
that's another story.
But (as I said before) this isn't terribly important. Just use whatever
file format your software creates and consumes.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TigerMan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:00 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
he may mean Micro DV
"AnthonyR" <toomuchspam@tolisthere.com> wrote in message
news:vzAed.174891$4h7.32895313@twister.nyc.rr.com...
| Quote: |
"nerdz_r_us" <nerdz_r_us@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:417aca4c$0$14204$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Hi Bill;
I am not one of the experts here, not by a long shot. I want to get that
straight. That being said, I was just in the same situation as you. I
wanted
to get a camcorder for family oriented home movies to send back home. I
went
to several stores and asked that almighty question "which is better..
miniDV
or digital tape?"
Bill, just to interject here...I assume you mean miniDVD as opposed to
digital tape, right?
Because miniDV is digital tape, so that might confuse people.
miniDV (digital tape) is different from miniDVD, these companies don't
make it easy, do they?
LOL
AnthonyR.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TigerMan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:03 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
yeah that is a good program and has smart rendering in it as well for the
unedited parts of the video. it would be good to see that as standard in
Premiere Pro 2
"AnthonyR" <toomuchspam@tolisthere.com> wrote in message
news:RHAed.174896$4h7.32898150@twister.nyc.rr.com...
| Quote: |
"TigerMan" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
news:417acafc$0$11774$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
which mpeg2 editors can do that?
"luminos" <logos1@trip.net> wrote in message
news:10nli7g3eh2uf97@news20.forteinc.com...
"TigerMan" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
news:417ac6f4$0$10351$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Mini DV is better quality than MPEG2. the better quality the master is
the better and correct me if I am wrong that mini dv edits with little
or no loss. there are mpeg2 editors that retain un-edited portions.
mini dv is more precise at cutting
This is generally true, however, some of the newer Mpeg2 editors are
frame accurate: They expand and rewrite the frames of I , B, P in
software.
I just tried the new Main Concept MPEG PRO Plug v.1.04 in for Premiere
Pro, it's amazing!
It allows you to do frame accurate editing on all types of Mpeg files
right on the timeline, just like it's dv-avi.
But please don't confuse this with the regular, Main Concept Mpeg Plug in
encoder which is just used for encoding the final output to mpeg video
from the timeline, the 2 products are similarly named and can be confused!
It's the $250 Plug in, I am talking about, or more for the HD Version.
There is a demo on their site, it is amazing the editing ability of mpeg
in premiere pro, to bad adobe doesn't include this, maybe in the next
upgrade?
Here is the link:
http://www.mainconcept.com/mpeg_pro.shtml#standard
and demo link:
http://downloads.mainconcept.com/fdl.php?downloads.mainconcept.com+MPEGProv1.0.4+mpegprov1.0.4.exe
this has changed how I think about editing in mpeg in Premiere, in fact
with this plug in you can capture directly to Premiere Pro in Mpeg2 from a
dv camcorder or a miniDVD camcorder, and edit in Mpeg2 on the timeline and
it will only render the changes with smart rendering to preserve the
quality and save much time.
Too bad it costs so much as a plug in, plus the price of Premiere pro, but
I suspect with the new Liquid Edition 6 doing native frame accurate mpeg
editing now, that this will become more common.
AnthonyR.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luminos
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:12 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote in message
news:10nlkf6i827ld65@corp.supernews.com...
| Quote: | "luminos" wrote ...
The camcorder mentioned by the OP uses USB2.
Many (most?) camcorders have USB (1 or 2) for transferring
still pictures. Doesn't preclude using Firewire for transfer of
full-frame full-speed video (such as DV).
We're still waiting for a list of camcorders that use USB2
for transfer of DV video. So far, the list is empty.
|
Nonsense. The Sony camcorder mention by the OP has USB2 transfer of video. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Rubin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:22 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"nerdz_r_us" <nerdz_r_us@yahoo.com> writes:
| Quote: | I am not one of the experts here, not by a long shot. I want to get that
straight. That being said, I was just in the same situation as you. I wanted
to get a camcorder for family oriented home movies to send back home.
|
For most amateur purposes, the DVD video quality is fine, but
unfortunately all DVD camcorders I know of use those mini-DVD's that
only hold 30 minutes of video at full rate. Mini-DV holds 1 hour and
hi-8 (what I use right now) holds two hours. I think of getting a
Mini-DV camera but what I really want is a full sized DVD camera that
uses normal DVD-R or DVD+R. The camera would be about the size of my
hi-8 camera but would hold 2 hours of video on a 4.7 gb disc, 3 hours
on the new dual layer discs. Why does nobody make those? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smarty
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:46 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
Scott,
Your post and one other both comment on using slower and less capable
computers for video editing. It is entirely true that lesser machines can be
used for video editing. My first video editing home computer was an Apple
Quadra 660AV (about 13 years ago) with a 25 MHz processor and 32 MB of RAM
and it was indeed a far less capable machine. My first Intel based PC for
video editing was also of the same class. I mostly was suggesting a modern 2
GHz 512MB (or better) machine to the original poster because none of us like
to wait 24 hours or longer to render a two hour video! And machines of the
class I recommend can be had for $400 if you know how to shop for them!
Slower machines are a poor choice for this specific application.
Smarty
<sgordon@changethisparttohardbat.com> wrote in message
news:i7Aed.670$_3.12221@typhoon.sonic.net...
| Quote: | In rec.video.production Smarty <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
: Your home computer, in order to do good editing on miniDV (tapes) which
: contain avi files, requires quite a bit of disk space for editing,
typically
: 50 to 100 GB would be recommended at a minimum, since these files are
about
: 22 GB per hour of recording. The home computer needs a fast processor
(at
: least a couple gigahertz), a half a gig of RAM or more,
I have only 256Mb memory and 1.4GHz processor. I use Vegas-Video,
VirtualDub, TMPGE, DVD-Lab, Dynapel, CoolEdit, NTrack, and other
software with no problems. However, I don't even want to talk
about disk space. :)
Scott
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smarty
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:56 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
I agree with Ed that the DV tape does not, strictly speaking, contain an avi
file. The avi file format is a Windows concept, with very specific file
format (actually Type 1 and Type 2 formats) which the camcorder does not
inherently know or use. The capture device and its' driver need to know how
to build an avi file during the transfer of the camcorder data using
whatever operating system support is provided.
Smarty
"Ed Anson" <EdAnson@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MvednYImZ_y3BOfcRVn-pA@comcast.com...
| Quote: | Smarty wrote:
Bill,
snip
Your home computer, in order to do good editing on miniDV (tapes) which
contain avi files, requires quite a bit of disk space for editing,
typically 50 to 100 GB would be recommended at a minimum, since these
files are about 22 GB per hour of recording. The home computer needs a
fast processor (at least a couple gigahertz), a half a gig of RAM or
more, and a relative;y fast I/O capability. The editing software for
doing avi editing is extremely mature and stable, and ranges from
shareware to some very nice high end predicts costing hundreds or even
thousands. This format is, after all, what professionals use rather than
editing mpeg2 files directly off a DVD.
Although these are good recommendations for a video editing system, they
are by no means the minimum requirements. For example, I started out
serious video editing with an 800 MHz cpu and only 256 MB RAM. Of course,
I have a much more capable system now, and that speeds up the job of
editing quite a bit.
The only performance requirement you really need to be concerned about is
your hard drive. Check the required drive rotational speed and transfer
rate for the software you will use. [That info is available from a variety
of web sites.] If you have a fairly new desktop computer, you probably
needn't worry, but some laptops and older computers aren't up to the task.
BTW: A miniDV tape contains a DV data stream, not avi files. If you
capture the data to a Windows computer, you will most likely store it in
an avi file. Other platforms use different file types. But you don't need
to worry about that. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smarty
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 4:10 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
Frame-based editing on an avi file (using miniDV format data) has a unique
and linearly spaced frame each and every 30th of a second (in NTSC) so that
an individual edit point could be 1/30th of a second away from its' nearest
neighbor.
Frame-based editing on an mpeg2 file, using groups of pictures (GOPs) which
contain 15 frames apiece (the standard used for DVD encoding) can only be
every half second apart, even if a software interpolator or some other
"filter" or algorithm or method is used to try to simulate the transition
between two adjacent frames.
Thus, the precision of the edit of an mpeg2 file can only be effectively 15
times more coarse (twice per second instead of 30 times per second). For
most video, this is often enough, since things do not change to the human
observer in most instances over such a short time span nor do they require
such extreme precision in editing. The exceptions to this rule arise in high
motion rate situations where edit points in one half second steps are just
too coarse. The best example I am aware of is a diagonally moving black
hockey puck traversing a white field of ice at high speed. The mpeg2
algorithm itself has a very hard time with motion estimation with this type
of content. And editing this type of material will surely reveal very ugly
effects where the "splices" occur if you use an mpeg2 editor.
If you are editing a 30 second television commercial and want to maintain
precise, accurate, and smooth edits, the avi editor is unquestionably the
right way to go. Home movies are usually much less demanding in this regard
and could use an mpeg2 editor without noticeable problems, but there are
certainly a lot of exceptions, ice hockey being a good one.
Smarty
"luminos" <logos1@trip.net> wrote in message
news:10nli7g3eh2uf97@news20.forteinc.com...
| Quote: |
"TigerMan" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
news:417ac6f4$0$10351$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Mini DV is better quality than MPEG2. the better quality the master is
the better and correct me if I am wrong that mini dv edits with little or
no loss. there are mpeg2 editors that retain un-edited portions. mini dv
is more precise at cutting
This is generally true, however, some of the newer Mpeg2 editors are frame
accurate: They expand and rewrite the frames of I , B, P in software.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luminos
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:36 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:19udnec3KbRub-fcRVn-oA@adelphia.com...
| Quote: | Frame-based editing on an avi file (using miniDV format data) has a unique
and linearly spaced frame each and every 30th of a second (in NTSC) so
that an individual edit point could be 1/30th of a second away from its'
nearest neighbor.
|
I suggest you try editing with VideoReDo. The edit points are not in .5
seconds, and the algorithm is quite remarkable, providing edit points in
hundreths of a second at the finest settings. It is very easy to see the
actual movement with 1/30th of a second! After all, the DVD output
algorithm for mpeg2 is 30 frames per second. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Crowley
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 7:44 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
| Quote: | "Richard Crowley" wrote ...
Many (most?) camcorders have USB (1 or 2) for transferring
still pictures. Doesn't preclude using Firewire for transfer of
full-frame full-speed video (such as DV).
We're still waiting for a list of camcorders that use USB2
for transfer of DV video. So far, the list is empty.
|
"luminos" wrote ...
| Quote: | Nonsense. The Sony camcorder mention by the OP has USB2 transfer of
video.
|
Perhaps we should define "video". Yes, the DCR-DVD201
mentioned by the OP transfers "video" via USB2, but that is
MPEG (having been previously encoded and stored on a mini-
DVD-R disk).
The list is still empty.
Currently displayed on www.sonystyle.com....
"USB Interface Allows digital still images and MPEG1 movies,
stored on Memory Stick® Media, to be easily transferred to
Microsoft® Windows® operating system compatible or
Macintosh® computers equipped with USB terminals. Simply
plug in the supplied USB cable from your camera to the
computer's USB port for fast access to your pictures. "
"i.LINK®2 DV Interface (IEEE1394) A high speed bi-directional
digital video/audio communication between two compatible
devices equipped with an IEEE1394 interface, including
camcorders, digital VTRs and PCs."
The OP asked whether Mini-DV or Mini-DVD was "better"
and I don't think there is any serious contention that MPEG
is higher quality than DV. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smarty
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:29 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
luminos,
VideoReDo really is an excellent program, and does reconstruct a 30 frame
per second time base for editing. The left and right arrow keys do indeed
step through the video content in 1/30th of a second clicks.
However, the mpeg2 encoding scheme does not ensure discrete and unique and
separate frames at this rate. Rather, it only encodes video whose motion
vectors meet or exceed pre-determined thresholds. For the mpeg2 encoders
which have user-specified motion estimation controls, then choosing the
right thresholds for the specific type of video content could guarantee that
the mpeg2 compressed stream does indeed have the necessary frame to frame
detail to permit editing on these 30 samples per second to achieve absolute
accuracy. For the vast majority of situations, especially in a consumer DVD
camcorder, these thresholds are NOT user specified. More importantly, by the
time VideoReDo sees the video content, the camera's encoder has made a lot
of premature and incorrect assumptions about what to keep and what to
discard, and has thrown away 90% of the "avi" sampled content which can
NEVER be accurately regenerated. This is the very reason why multi-pass
mpeg2 encoders, which first parse the video and build predictive and
backward (B and P frame) candidates on the first pass before doing the
actual mpeg2 encoding on the 2nd pass look so much better.
My point before as well as now is that avi / linearly sampled and lightly
compressed (non intraframe compressed) video from a miniDV camcorder has
nearly 10 times the data to work with, and no "rash assumptions" about what
a cheap hardware encoder would keep or discard as it runs "on-the-fly"
attempting to write a DVD and throw away 90% of the data in the process. No
amount of editing software sophistication can recover the original detail,
despite appearances to the contrary.
Does any of this matter in real, day to day editing? My opinion is that it
matters a great deal for critical editing work and not much at all for most
users who are merely doing home movies.
Smarty
"luminos" <logos1@trip.net> wrote in message
news:10nm59eh4afuq0e@news20.forteinc.com...
| Quote: |
"Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:19udnec3KbRub-fcRVn-oA@adelphia.com...
Frame-based editing on an avi file (using miniDV format data) has a
unique and linearly spaced frame each and every 30th of a second (in
NTSC) so that an individual edit point could be 1/30th of a second away
from its' nearest neighbor.
I suggest you try editing with VideoReDo. The edit points are not in .5
seconds, and the algorithm is quite remarkable, providing edit points in
hundreths of a second at the finest settings. It is very easy to see the
actual movement with 1/30th of a second! After all, the DVD output
algorithm for mpeg2 is 30 frames per second.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in