I've been doing some more surprising tests here in the studio.
Man, I'm surprised.
When I was a consultant for Ulead, I would hang out on the Pinnacle forum to read comments and try to get a feel for why some individuals had rejected MediaStudio Pro in favor of Liquid.
One of the comments that I remember reading was from a guy who had tried both editors and he insisted the output quality of the Pinnacle Liquid software was better than the output quality of Ulead MediaStudio Pro.
Today, I've been doing some more comparisons between the Pinnacle Studio Ultimate 11 output with the output of both VideoStudio and MediaStudio Pro.
VideoStudio and MediaStudio Pro seem to have identical render engines so their output quality is practically the same.
But I am really astonished to see how much better the Pinnacle render engine performs on virtually *all* tests.
This just shocks me; but it seems to confirm what that fellow said back in 2003.
First, I took a Panasonic VDR-M30 DVD camcorder long GOP MPEG-2 standard definition file...
NTSC drop frame (29.97 fps)
MPEG files
24 bits, 704 x 480, 29.97 fps
Upper Field First
(DVD-NTSC), 4:3
Video data rate: Variable (Max. 8800 kbps)
Audio data rate: 256 kbps
Then I transcoded this file in Pinnacle Studio Ultimate 11 to be a type 2 DV .avi file.
Then I transcoded the same Panasonic file in Ulead's software to be both type 2 and type 1 DV .avi files.
Then I did a visual comparison of the playback and the Pinnacle DV .avi file was far better than those from either Corel (Ulead) NLE.
Next, I took the Pinnacle DV .avi file and I converted it back to MPEG-2 at two different data rates... 8500 and 9800... using Pinnacle Studio Ultimate 11.
Next, I took the Pinnacle DV .avi file and I converted it back to MPEG-2 at 9800 in the Corel (Ulead) software.
The Pinnacle MPEG-2 output was superior at both data rates to the Corel output.
In the past, I found it difficult to believe that the output from one non-linear video editor could be so much better than the output of another non-linear video editor.
I was clearly mistaken.
The difference is quite stark here.
I'm concerned about this for Corel's sake.
I think I can prove to anybody at the company who is willing to do some simple tests that the output of competing software is somewhat better.
Kind of depressing to learn this.
Jerry Jones
http://www.jonesgroup.net