| Author |
Message |
luminos
Guest
|
 Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:51 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:LZadnUXOmclasubcRVn-tg@adelphia.com...
| Quote: | 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
|
I do not disagree with anything you say.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Smarty
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 9:03 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
luminos,
I failed to say "Thank You" for mentioning VideoReDo. I was originally
toying with the idea of buying TMPGE's new standalone MPEG2 editor, but your
comment led me to take a look at VideReDo. I now feel like it should be the
one to buy rather than TMPGE, and would not have considered it had you not
brought it up.
For whatever it is worth, I am doing most of my editing these days on mpeg2
files, both from the PVR-250 boards and from my standalone recorder's VOB
files. I really do appreciate how nicely VideReDo works, and I fed it a
number of high-rate video streams with very rapid motion to see how the
software behaves. Just as you said, it is a super product, and I will "vote"
with my wallet!
Thanks again,
Smarty
"luminos" <logos1@trip.net> wrote in message
news:10nmd78sugg38a6@news20.forteinc.com...
| Quote: |
"Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:LZadnUXOmclasubcRVn-tg@adelphia.com...
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
I do not disagree with anything you say.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Commentator
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 9:05 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"AnthonyR" <toomuchspam@tolisthere.com> wrote in message
news:KTyed.33474$4C.7714133@twister.nyc.rr.com...
| 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.
AnthonyR.
|
It is true that the encoded stream is not converted in any way. But your
computer won't recognize what to do with it unless it is placed in an AVI
wrapper. An AVI file does not define the encoding, which is why files with
different encoding / codecs can have the same AVI extension. Among other
things, the AVI wrapper tells your software what codec to use.
--
I am 3 of 10. Prepare to be assimilated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Smolinsky
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:00 pm Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:12:37 -0400, "Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | Bill,
If your home computer is up to the task (and this is a big if which I will
expand upon below), I would opt for the DV tape format rather than record
directly onto disk. My reasoning is as follows:
1. The mpeg2 encoders found in DVD camcorders which do real-time encoding to
the disk are generally weak, leaving artifacts which become especially
apparent when you use the longer recording times.
2. The inherent recording capacity of a miniDV tape is nominally 10 times as
great as that of a mini DVD disk used in the DVD camcorders, thus capturing
considerably more raw detail on the tape.
3. The minDV tape is ultimately more precisely edited, since it contains far
less compressed video and has a linear format with respect to time base.
This makes for extremely precise edits and lessens the opportunity for time
base issues like lip synch errors to appear later in the editing process.
4. The media (miniDV tape) is less expensive.
5. The miniDV camcorders and tapes have been around for nearly a decade and
are reliable and very mature. The camcorders themselves typically have more
features per dollar than the DVD style and there are a wider variety offered
as well.
Having made these points (and there are certainly good arguments to be made
for the opposing choice as well), I want to briefly qualify the editing
computer issue mentioned above.
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.
I and others would be glad to elaborate and help you make specific editing
and authoring choices when you get to that stage.
One final caution..........if you are someone looking for fast, simple, and
basic........and are not really anxious to get into the more complex
computer and editing approach I am proposing, then I would look for a simple
DVD camcorder with the approach that a little editing on the computer and
within the camcorder may be enough.
Also....as regards camcorders in general......I have personally owned many
over the years and keep coming back to Sony brand stuff despite occasional
Canon, Panasonic, and other alternatives. I am not surprised that Sony still
has "top selling" status in these areas based on your comment, and would buy
another Sony without hesitation. Now if they would just drop the price of
their new HD camcorder from $3700 a wee bit..............
Smarty
"Bill" <3726414@spamhole.com> wrote in message
news:6eac4d8d.0410230849.7367bf4c@posting.google.com...
Hello
I am in the market for a family-oriented (vacations, birthday parties,
etc) Camcorder and am looking for input on whether DVD or MiniDV is
the better option.
I WILL be doing video editing on the home computer. In addition, I am
looking for the longest battery life possible.
Budget is no more than $800 for the camera itself.
A quick look at the top sellers for both are
(DVD) Sony DCR-DVD201
(MiniDV) Sony DCR-HC20/HC40
any info is appreciated
thanks
|
Seperate , dedicated HD for the video editing...plain and simple. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Smolinsky
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:01 pm Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:36:47 +0200, Roman Svihorik
<gemini@post.mbc.sk> wrote:
| Quote: | Anthony, I would support you - FireWire just transfers video data so it
must be avi format on the tape.
Roman
AnthonyR wrote:
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.
|
It is in DV format on the tape AND in DV format in the captured .avi
file....... .avi is just a shell for different types of formats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Crunchy Doodle
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:10 pm Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
My Panasonic PV-GS400 will transfer DV video with either Firewire or
USB2. So, now your list has one entry.
Bye. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PTravel
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 10:11 pm Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"AnthonyR" <toomuchspam@tolisthere.com> wrote in message
news:KTyed.33474$4C.7714133@twister.nyc.rr.com...
| 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?
|
He's right. AVI is just a file wrapper which can hold data in a variety of
formats. MiniDV uses the DV25 format and does not use an AVI file. When
you "capture" miniDV, you are merely transferring the data from the
DV25-formatted tape to an AVI-formatted file on the computer.
| Quote: | 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.
AnthonyR.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PTravel
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 10:14 pm 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?"
|
If, by "digital tape," you mean Digital 8, they are, in theory, identical in
quality. Both formats store data in DV25 format, and both can be
transferred to a computer for editing. However, in practice, Digital 8 is a
low-end consumer format, meaning that the cameras will be of poorer
quality -- poorer electronics, optics, etc.
| Quote: | The question they put back to me was "how much editing are
you going to be doing on your computer?". I was told that miniDV captures
in
mpeg while tape captures in AVI and mpeg is very limited to how much
editing
you can do to it. Since I wanted to do more than just add credits and a
menu
I choose the digital tape. It was that simple for me.
As for the camera? I was tossing up between the Canon and the Sony. I have
owned a couple Sony Hi8 before and was very pleased but the Canon was on
special. I think I should have stayed with the Sony but in the end I took
the better deal Canon. To be honest, I have had no problems with the Canon
so far and am quite pleased. Mind you, this is just your typical family
birthdays, plays, home movies with the kids as stars kinda deal. Nothing
special.
Hope that helped.
Paul
"Bailey Savings & Loan" <nospam@no-spam.iwl> wrote in message
news:Puwed.294658$MQ5.87014@attbi_s52...
If you plan on editing your video on a computer, go with mini-DV. If you
just
want disks to play on your TV, and that is all you are ever going to do
with
your video, the disk is probably OK. It isn't like you can't edit these
disks,
but like someone else says, the on-the-fly MPEG2 encoders of these DVD
camcorders is certainly not as clean as mini-DV.
"Bill" <3726414@spamhole.com> wrote in message
news:6eac4d8d.0410230849.7367bf4c@posting.google.com...
Hello
I am in the market for a family-oriented (vacations, birthday parties,
etc) Camcorder and am looking for input on whether DVD or MiniDV is
the better option.
I WILL be doing video editing on the home computer. In addition, I am
looking for the longest battery life possible.
Budget is no more than $800 for the camera itself.
A quick look at the top sellers for both are
(DVD) Sony DCR-DVD201
(MiniDV) Sony DCR-HC20/HC40
any info is appreciated
thanks
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PTravel
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Oct 24, 2004 10:17 pm Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:7xbret3tqy.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
| Quote: | "nerdz_r_us" <nerdz_r_us@yahoo.com> writes:
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.
|
MiniDV holds 60 minutes at standard play and 90 minutes at extended play.
Note, too, that there is no difference in quality between standard and
extended play -- it's the same data, just packed more closely in extended.
There is a greater risk of drop outs, and may be compatibility issues with
other camcorders, but extended play video quality is identical to standard
play.
Also note that there are miniDV tapes available that will provide up to 2
hours recording time at extended play.
| Quote: | 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 |
|
|
Roman Svihorik
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:17 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
Not so far. MPEG2 format can not be edited as easy as avi format.
Format is the point. Not transfer line.
Roman
Bailey Savings & Loan wrote:
| Quote: | My question is: do these DVD camcorders till have firewire input/output like
mini-DV camcorders?
If they do have firewire, editing video might not be too bad. Quality would
probably not be as good as straight mini-DV format, but certainly acceptable for
many people. If these camcorders lack firewire input/output, I would for sure go
with mini-DV. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AnthonyR
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:08 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
Tigerman,
yes I agree, it would be good for Premiere pro 2, especially if the upgrade
is only $99 or $149 for registered users, then they can save from the cost
of $250 for the plug in. :)
Let's wait and see what else they can add.
But with newer dvd camera's coming out everyday which capture already in
mpeg2 and maybe some high definition models will use mpeg4 to fit all that
info, editing directly on mpeg will makes sense at that point.
I see the point about mpeg2 being very lossy as a capture format but
considering how much more info a hdtv picture will have to begin with, maybe
a higher compression capture scheme will be necessary, unless they start
making blu-ray camera devices.
AnthonyR.
"TigerMan" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
news:417ae354$0$14203$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
| Quote: | 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...
"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 |
|
|
AnthonyR
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:20 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
"Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:64OdnZwdetsAqubcRVn-pw@adelphia.com...
| Quote: | luminos,
I failed to say "Thank You" for mentioning VideoReDo. I was originally
toying with the idea of buying TMPGE's new standalone MPEG2 editor, but
your comment led me to take a look at VideReDo. I now feel like it should
be the one to buy rather than TMPGE, and would not have considered it had
you not brought it up.
For whatever it is worth, I am doing most of my editing these days on
mpeg2 files, both from the PVR-250 boards and from my standalone
recorder's VOB files. I really do appreciate how nicely VideReDo works,
and I fed it a number of high-rate video streams with very rapid motion to
see how the software behaves. Just as you said, it is a super product, and
I will "vote" with my wallet!
Thanks again,
Smarty
|
Guys, I too feel the same way about everything you both said, and find
myself in the same boat editing video captures from my WinTV PVR board and
standalone VOB files in mpeg also. For those video's it is appropriate.
That is also why I was amazed at the main concept mpeg pro plug in cause it
let me capture directly in premiere pro using the plug-in to recognize my
Hauppauge TV Tuner and edit the mpeg captured directly on the premiere
timeline.
I tried VideoReDo,a nd think it's a great program also, but I like using my
normal editor that I am use to more.
So both ways are good solutions when having to deal with mpeg files.
:)
AnthonyR. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TigerMan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:20 am Post subject:
Re: DVD camcorder or MiniDV? |
|
|
or even a camera with a HDD. JVC are about to release one with a memory card
and think it is MPEG2 format. i had a JVC mini DV but swapped it for a Canon
and glad I did, the JVC was a poor camera so hope they improve their quality
with these new models
"AnthonyR" <toomuchspam@tolisthere.com> wrote in message
news:fJVed.96730$Ot3.54425@twister.nyc.rr.com...
| Quote: | Tigerman,
yes I agree, it would be good for Premiere pro 2, especially if the
upgrade is only $99 or $149 for registered users, then they can save from
the cost of $250 for the plug in. :)
Let's wait and see what else they can add.
But with newer dvd camera's coming out everyday which capture already in
mpeg2 and maybe some high definition models will use mpeg4 to fit all that
info, editing directly on mpeg will makes sense at that point.
I see the point about mpeg2 being very lossy as a capture format but
considering how much more info a hdtv picture will have to begin with,
maybe a higher compression capture scheme will be necessary, unless they
start making blu-ray camera devices.
AnthonyR.
"TigerMan" <nospam@antispam.com> wrote in message
news:417ae354$0$14203$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
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...
"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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in