From DVD to Ulead and onto DVD

[johnj46]

I think I have read all the tutorials and still have a problem in V10 - maybe I should go back to V9.
Basically I have some video which was recorded on to a dvd via my camcorder (also have it on tape but using dvd seems more economical).
I can capture the video and it looks ok but when I edit it then render the finished product to dvd it never comes out right. 1 version seems to miss frames another is very jerky.
Is there an optimum setting for capturing and then rendering?
I have simply captured as mpeg then edited it and then made a video file. The video file was used to record to disc. It all seems so simple but I can't get it to look right. I have tried various disc templates and settings but nothing seems to work right. I do not recall having this problem with v9.

[Ken Veal]

Have you
tried following the recommended proceedures to the letter.
(at the top of page 1)
considered capturing the DV AVI.
If neither of those work I think that learned members will
need more details on precisely what you have done as part of
your workflow

[Ken Berry]

Yes, apart from Kenneth's suggestion that you read and follow the recommended procedure, at the very least we need to know a few things. Is your camcorder digital or analogue? If digital, does it actually use a mini DVD disc or a mini DV tape (or, for that matter, hard disc)? How exactly (stepo by step) did you transfer the video from the camcorder to the DVD? Were you using the DVD merely as an archive data disk, or did you somehow actually create a video format DVD -- if so, how? What was the format of the video when you transferred it to DVD? What format are you trying to 'capture' it in using Video Studio? How are you trying to 'capture' it from the DVD? And what are your computer specifications and operating system?

[DVDDoug]

Basically I have some video which was recorded on to a dvd via my camcorder...

Are you saying that you have a camcorder that records directly to DVD?

If so, the trick is to avoid re-coding (re-rendering) the MPEG. (Every time you encode an MPEG, you loose some quality.)

Somewhere there's a check-box that says same as project settings. I forget where that is, but it keeps you form choosing a different bitrate, which would force a re-code.

Most edits cannot be done without a decode-re-code cycle... Things like color-adjustment, or transitions... almost anything except simple cutting & splicing requires a decode/re-code cycle. (Actually, MPEGs are not meant to be edited.)

If you must re-code, use a high bitrate.

...also have it on tape...

If that's DV tape, it would be much better to use the DV (per the recommended procedures).

[johnj46]

Thanks to everyone for your help. I will work through the answers but briefly, I recorded on DV tape and also on DVD in a DVD recorder, using AV straight from the camera as a back up measure. I can capture the video from the DVD and it looks fine but once I have edited it and re-rendered it, that's when things go wrong. As far as I am aware I have followed the instructions to the letter and even noted all the settings so that they are the same but I suspect you are right and that is where the problem is.
As a last resort I am now using the DV tape with highest bit rate as MPEG1. Most of it should not be re-rendered but as you say, the slightest change causes rendering and then a long wait to see the results.
John.

[Trevor Andrew]

Hi John

If you have a digital camera.

You should capture to Dv-Avi via firewire

Edit your project in Avi.

Create a video file (share create video file) selecting Pal-Dvd as the template

Use the new file in Share Create Disc-Add Video

This will produce the best results.


If you have captured to dvd then imported to vs ???????? you are now working and editing in Mpeg.
The original data Dv-Avi from your camera being re-coded twice to Mpeg.
From the camera to dvd then dvd to Vs although the latter may be copied?
Editing in mpeg format is not recommended.

Ok you mention Mpeg 1 (hope this was a typing error and you meant 2)
Mpeg 1 is low quality. Mpeg 2 should be used for Dvd.

Again

If you have a digital camera.

You should capture to Dv-Avi via firewire


Trevor

[johnj46]

Trevor thanks for that.
I must be reading the wrong tutorials, the last one I read suggested using mpeg1 as this does not have the sound encoded in the video so was better for editing. What you say makes more sense from what I had done previously in vs6, 8 and 9. But I never seem to hit it first time - I always seem to be messing around with settings.

I will try it your way and scrap the earlier mpg version.

Thanks

John.

[Ken Berry]

This is also why I asked about the DVD you used as back-up: whether you had backed up your original capture as an archive disc in the same format as the capture (i.e. DV) or whether you had in fact made it a video DVD (i.e. mpeg-2). If the former, then you would have used 3 and possibly 4 DVDs just to archive one hour of DV in that same format. But it sounds as though you used the latter method, and others have already mentioned the dangers inherent in that of quality degradation through repeated recodings.

A footnote about mpeg-1 -- while I exaggerate, in digital video terms, it is now the lowest of the low in terms of quality. At best, it will give you quality equivalent to a VHS tape. So if you have DV input and the ability to burn a high quality disc, then do as the others have suggested: capture in DV/AVI, edit in DV/AVI, produce a DVD-compatible mpeg-2, then burn that to disc.

I wonder, though, if you might have been having some confusion over Encoder Type 1 and Encoder Type 2 -- and the recommendation to use Type 1 -- and somehow associated these with mpeg-1 and mpeg-2... Just a thought. But if by chance you did, then be aware that they have nothing to do with the mpeg format in any flavour. They are the two ways of capturing DV format in the same format. And they do have something to do with audio, though not quite in the way you describe. Type 1 DV encodes the video and audio in one stream. It is the 'easier' DV format to capture in for most people/computers. Type 2 captures video and audio as separate streams (though all in one file). But less powerful computers appear to have some difficulty handling this. And apart from some top end software which will only work with Type 2 DV, there is no particular advantage for people in using Type 2 rather than Type 1. So that is why we generally recommend that people use Type 1 rather than 2.

[heinz-oz]

Trevor thanks for that.
I must be reading the wrong tutorials, the last one I read suggested using mpeg1 as this does not have the sound encoded in the video so was better for editing. What you say makes more sense from what I had done previously in vs6, 8 and 9. But I never seem to hit it first time - I always seem to be messing around with settings.

I will try it your way and scrap the earlier mpg version.

Thanks

John.

You lost me here a bit. Are you confusing mpeg1 and mpeg2 with DV-AVI type 1 and type 2?

Mpeg1 is commonly used for VCD creation (low quality), mpeg2 is needed to create a DVD. Both, AFAIK, have the sound muxed with the video (one stream).

DV-AVI type1 has the sound and video in one stream, DV-AVI type2 uses a separate stream for video and audio.

The video recorded on your DVD recorder is likely going to be a different compression and format but the same restrictions apply. It will be a lossy compression.

Once a video clip has been authored to DVD it will usually be mpeg2 with the likely problem of out-of-sync and loss in quality if it is edited and recoded. Recoding (rendering is needed when you add transitions, titles etc). That goes for both, DV-AVI and mpeg. DV-AVI is virtually loss-less while mpeg is a lossy compression. That's why you have a noticable quality drop after editing/recoding with mpeg but not with DV-AVI.

[johnj46]

Thank you Ken.
That does clear up a few things and yes, you are right, I was confusing mpeg 2 and dv2. I have now gone back to the original tape and am doing exactly as you and Trevor (and others) suggested.
Thanks to everyone for your comments and help.

John.