VOB Editing in Ulead--alternative to PreElements 2.0?

[Stonewall]

I have been using Premiere Elements 2 for a while and have had some success in adding small clips from a vob source file to my projects, BUT trying to actually create a DVD from 5-6 VOB's (daughter's birthday footage over the years) has given me issues. Sometimes I get no audio, sometimes audio is out of sync, sometimes things just hang up.

Somebody in and PreEl forum suggested that Ulead VS9 could edit the vob's in their native mpeg format. Now, I used up my trial period on Ulead before I could get to try this-- but is it a capability of Ulead products? Or is the recomended wisdom to convert to AVI's before pulling into UVS9?

My attempted workflow in PreEl was:
to attempt to make a video where there are 5-6 VOB files from different discs, copied to the HD. For instance, VOB1 - Birthday 1991, VOB2 - Birthday 1994, VOB3- Birthday 1999, etc. I will pull them into a project, cut out some video, make specific clips, sort clips on the timeline as I determine the Video should flow, add a few transitions. Then I will render, if I haven't already, add DVD scene markers and burn. Basically, the same as any workflow.

I wonder if I am totally off my rocker, using programs for a VOB editor when that's not what its primary function is, and should go try MPEG Video Wizard (again?) or Video Re-Do, or some other kind of straight VOB editor? (Any suggestions?)

I need the wisdom of user who have tried and either failed and went to something else or what Ulead product did you use to make it work.

(I know, I should have been more judicious with my trial period time)

Any insight would be appreciated.

[Eric VS9]

Try this trick go to http://www.yehiaeg.com
download the program called Extension Changer and install
after install simply right click the VOB file in Exploer and change to MPG (do not a the . Just type MPG)
then you can pull the file into Ulead.

[Ken Berry]

There are of course a variety of ways of getting VOBs into Video Studio, though I don't think it is really necessary, except perhaps in extreme cases, to actually download a special program to change the extension to mpg. You can do this with a Windows Rename command. VS9 also has an Insert DVD/DVD-VR command which brings up a console dividing the DVD into Chapters. You can preview which chapters you want, select the box to the left of the chapter and click on Import. With some DVDs, this seems to work better if the contents of the DVD have been copied to a temp folder on the hard disk.

But that was not really the point of your question. Whether VS, or any of the other general video editors in this price range, are made to edit mpeg-2s is still a moot question, I'm afraid, with very active and vocal proponents of each side of the argument. Being a lawyer, I tend to sit somewhere in the middle: the answer to the above question seems to depend to an extent on your work flow, the resources your computer has, the amount of editing you are talking about, and the settings you use with the mpeg-2s. To my mind, if you have a good computer and keep the mpeg-2 bitrate in particular as high as possible, and also minimise the number of times you re-render, then the end result remains very good, and to all intents and purposes, to the naked eye at least, there will be little or no observable difference between a final mpeg-2 produced this way and one which has been produced only after all the editing has been done to a DV/AVI file.

The other side of your coin -- the suggestion you should first convert to DV/AVI -- is to my mind a worse alternative if you are starting off with an mpeg-2 and have no other format of that video, much less the original DV cassette (if indeed it originated on a DV camera). And let's face it, there are probably tens of thousands of people around the world every day who have no alternative but to capture in the first place using mpeg-2 as the capture format. High quality (i.e. high bitrate) mpeg-2 provides a good result. To then subject it to a conversion process to DV is certainly not going to produce a 'better' quality image than what went into it in the first place as an mpeg-2, and in fact, I believe the conversion process itself will either subtly or overtly degrade the original quality to a variable degree. Then you do your edits and render it back to mpeg-2 i.e. yet another render and a further variable degree of degradation.

To my mind, therefore, it is better to simply stick with your mpegs, edit them, and keep the final output quality the same as the input (which should not be difficult since your source material was obviously already DVD-compatible). This will allow you to use Smart Render as well -- though be aware that some people have problems when they use SR (particuarly in VS8, though less so in VS9). Problems include out of sync video and audio. (Some of these problems, though, I attribute to NTSC users using mpeg layer 2 audio when this is not part of the NTSC DVD standard, even though many NTSC players these days will play it.)

I personally (a PAL user) often find myself in a position where I have to edit mpeg-2s, as I don't have an analogue capture device which will capture to DV. (Well, in fact, I now do for 8mm analogue video, but that's a fairly recent development.) And I have never experienced any of the problems others report. But I have stuck to my simple rules outlined above.

If you do get into trouble, there are of course some specialised programs out there to help you resolve them. You mentioned VideoReDo, which is an excellent program. Another, which probably has more features, is Womble which is really a specialised mpeg editor rather than simply a remedial program.

Anyway, that's my two cents (or two dollars!!! ) worth. Others will have a quite different view.

[BrianCee]

except that mine is a two pence (or two pounds) worth - I would agree with Ken completely, I often import .vobs direct from DVD (or copy and rename) and edit and also when I capture from VHS tape I always capture direct to UVS as DVD/MPEG2 and have never had a problem in editing them or losing sound sync. I have never been a believer in converting analogue to DV AVI just because somebody somewhere said you can't edit mpeg and can only capture via a firewire, you can't improve on what you started with so why introduce the double conversion of mpeg to avi and then avi back to mpeg to burn a DVD - apart from the time it must be an option to introduce errors. I had an analogue capture card fitted when I purchased my PC and have found it extremely useful to capture old tapes and even direct from TV without any other conversion.

Does any one really need a special programme to rename a file extension ???

[DVDDoug]

I have experienced out-of-sync problems and occasional crashes when I edited MPEGs. (I was able to make a perfect DVD with the unedited file, but an edited version of the same file caused problems.)

So, I would NOT take the $100 risk unless you have other uses for it. (i.e. You could use it to author & burn DVDs.)

I have never had any problems with Womble MPEG Video Wizard. But Womble is an editor only. You can't author DVDs with it.

[heinz-oz]

Now I would like to add my two pennies worth here also, or should I say "hazard"

I don't use VS for starters, I use MF 7.3, but I feel that the same applies. I have had a great many right royal pains in the neck with trying to get any decent out put from mpeg files, straight mpeg as well as VOB renamed to mpeg. I never had any problem getting the files imported, that went smooth as, the result was never something I liked.

It all came about when a friend of mine wanted to use just a portion of a wedding DVD his sister had made by a professional. The very portion he wanted was actually spread over two VOB's to make matters worse. In the end I gave up, hooked my DVD player up to the AV in jack of my Panasonic GS 400 and transferred the footage to my PC as a DV-AVI file. Went as smooth as a newborne baby's bum.

What I'm trying to say here is this: It may be much simpler to think outside the square. Just because the source file is in digital format already does not mean you have to stick with that and all it's associated hassles.

Just a thought.

[Stonewall]

Thanks for the great, thoughtful, and detailed responses. (one reason I am still considering Ulead--this is a very good forum! I picked Adobe over Ulead initially because some still camera video I shot in a *mov format wouldn't play in Ulead and I was trying to produce something during the trial period. Turned out it was most likely a Quick Time setting I wish Womble had a forum like this)

My videos are mostly on 8mm, Hi8, and VHS. I have dubbed many with my LG dubber for backup and safety's sake. But you all have made some good points about coming into the computer as DV. I frankly have yet to try that--i have to borrow the in-law's 8mm video cameras just to make the copies--mine broke a few years ago.

It does appear that editing mpegs are problematic--sometimes works well, sometimes not at all. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to convert a compress video from the tape, to vob, then reencode to DV-AVI to edit, the reencode back to DVD when burnt. It may have to happen sometimes, but not the best way. It might should only be used when one doesn't have the time or the original tape. I am pondering buying a dedicated HD (about 200-300gb) just to use for video.

Right now, I am testing MPEG Video Wizard DVD. So far, its worked ok and might work fine for the tasks I have at hand. If anyone is interested, I will report back.

By the way, what is MF 7.3?

[Ken Berry]

Although I have a digital video camera (Canon 630i) and a growing DV home video collection, like many others (and yourself) I also have a sizeable 8mm analogue collection. Originally, as mentioned above, I was using a DV2000 capture card, which captured direct to DVD quality mpeg-2 and did quite a good job. But more recently, I decided I really wanted to do the best job possible (as I said, I have feet in both camps!! ) and bought a Sony DCR-TRV480E Digital 8 video camera. This particular model was only released last year, but is another in the Sony series of Digital 8 cameras which try to cover both worlds, and for what it is, does a mighty good job IMHO. It has all the bells and whistles of a modern digital camera, including touch screen menus, and the all important Firewire connection (and even a built in video light), but is bigger than the average DV digital camera because it uses Digital 8mm cassettes which, as you will know, are a bit bigger than a standard audio cassette.

But this model, and some others in the Sony digital 8 range (you have to be careful, because not all of their Digital 8s can do it), will take your old analogue 8mm AND Hi8 cassettes, and convert their signal to DV for capture on your computer via Firewire. The quality is surprisingly excellent and, again IMHO, so near the quality of my fully digital DV captures from the Canon, as not to be truly distinguishable by my naked eye at least. I am sure there are differences, but to me they are high quality DV captures. And very well worth the approx. US$400 I paid for it! And of course, I can also use it as a back up digital video camera too!!

As you are probably aware, there are also a range of higher cost analogue capture devices which have hardware DV capture capabilities built into them. The Canopus range springs to mind, but there are others. As I say, they are not cheap, and some are around the same price I paid for my Sony. But they too do an excellent job of converting analogue video signals to DV and transferring them to your computer. (They will also do hardware mpeg-2 direct captures as well, I believe.)

Changing the subject somewhat, I am interested in the fact that you have been using Premiere Elements 2. I have Elements 1, and quite liked it, though for some reason, never resolved, I could never get audio from my captured analogue tracks (captured with the capture card software, which does an excellent job. And the result happily plays audio in VS 8 and 9, and in all other video editors I have -- and I have quite a few -- except Premiere 1.5 and Elements 1.0.) However, this has now been overtaken by the Sony, and my original intention to upgrade to PE2 has been overtaken by my upgrading from Premiere Pro 1.5 (which I didn't really like, though never really took the time to learn ) to the recent Premiere Pro 2.0 which paradoxically I have fallen in love with! Principally, I cannot get over the ease of its audio controls, but of course there are a ton of other features, many of which I know I have not even vaguely discovered yet.

The wonderful world of video editing!!!

[Stonewall]

I appreciate the input. The wife and I are still looking yet undecided on the video camera. I "hope" it will transfer video nicely, whatever I get. My next video educational class, self-taught of course, will be to learn all I can about MPEG Video Wizard DVD. On top of that, I really need to try video capture direct to my computer...think outside the box a little more.

I have enjoyed Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0 so far, but I can concur with the general consensus that there is a steeper learning curve. This kind of program does seem like once you get over the inital learning curve, the payoffs will come later. And of course, not all video works, namely the vob problem that I am currently seeking a solution to. I did try converting some of the vob to AVI using a converter, but I don't think PreEL liked the AC3 music format (although I could be totally wrong on that). They have a fairly nice forum for support and, probably the tipping point in my purchase of it as my first movie-making software, a book that I could get. And the book is good and the authors answer questions in the forum etc. Nice Pro 2.0! That sounds nice. Would love to hear more about that. I forsee that some day, I will probably have about 4-6 video editor/authoring programs active on my computer. Is it a sickness?

The video camera issue has me perplexed--I am thinking about the Digital 8 but am still doing research.

I did attempt some vob editing with MPEG Video Wizard DVD last night. I combined various clips from several different vobs ( even some decrypted) and I was able to place simple chapter headings and burn with good quality. The time it took to burn to a DVD folder was longer than I thought it would be, seeing how things were being edited in "native" format. After burning to a folder on the hard drive, I used Nero and made a dvd. Not bad. Looks promising, but still, over $100 for just a video editor

[Ken Berry]

Ah yes, but a program that will edit mpegs! And think of the price of Premiere Pro, Sony Vegas, Canopus Edius or even Media Studio Pro -- a fair amount more than even the price of Womble... and most of them won't even look at mpegs.

Strange you should mention the AC-3 problem with Elements 2.0. I also had a problem with Dolby in Elements 1.0, but found that it did not support Dolby. I had assumed they would have fixed that in 2.0... but they may not have.

As for numbers of editors on one's computer, I blush to admit that I already have more than 7 -- and that is just editing programs. I also have 5 production end programs, plus Nero, plus a pile of other specialised video-related programs. And I suspect I may not be wholly unusual in this regard! Mind you, I don't use them all -- but I guess that just makes it worse!!!

[Stonewall]

Well, Ken, given some of your comments about the TRV480, I looked at it more closely. Long story short--bought it! The first thing I did was, well buy a firewire cable because it didn't come with one, then I did some capturing for the first time in Adobe, or any capturing period! And it worked well--very smooth and the quality was good. I can see that I will do a lot more of that.

I have shot some video with the new camera and have been pleased so far. It was a little tough using the flip out thing (can't remember its proper name) with the sun at your back! The steady shot really is nice too.

One question, if you don't mind, is I noticed, what to me, is an inordinate amount of what sounds like motor noise on my recordings. I can hear the sound of the camera. Now, one tape I caputured was actually shot on my sister Sony Hi8 camera--and the noise, or whine, seemed louder on that tape. I wondered if while caputing, if the length of the firewire cable or placement of the camera had anything to do with it. Admiting that last comment makes little sense, I am still hoping my camera is a little quiter. Did you notice this noise? Is your DV Canon any better?