Best quality from MiniDV

[burgo]

Maybe a daft question but here goes.

I have a Sony PC101 and use Videostudio 10 Plus and capture my footage on MiniDV.

When creating a DVD I always use HQ to create my movie, however, even this is compressed from its original DV format. With the advent of Hi-Def, if I was to try to create a HD-DVD from this footage could I get an improved quality picture or do I need to invest in a hi-def camera.

Like I say, may be a daft question.

thanks

[Black Lab]

AFAIK, it must be recored in HD in order to produce a HD DVD, but others will correct me if I am wrong.

Are you having problems with your quality, or just inquiring about HD?

[heinz-oz]

It doesn't matter what you do, the resultant quality can never be better than the source

[burgo]

I am thinking that when you convert dv to dvd there is a process of compression that takes place, the video is therefore degraded. I was wondering that with the new format discs coming in you could create movies in the quality they were recorded and not compressed.

I was really just wondering whether to buy a new camera now or wait for a while until the dust settles.

Thanks for the time you guys

[Ken Berry]

As far as HD cameras are concerned, the technology is already there, and there is a lot of software already which claims to work with it. How far it actually does so, though, is another matter

More importantly, your mention of new types of discs (BlueRay, etc) raises a whole different kettle of fish, and again will include the question of how well software is adapted to deal with it.

Overall, my own attitude is to wait longer to see how the dust settles. Price is also an important consideration. While at the moment HD cameras are expensive, the new disc technology (burners, players etc) is not only very thin on the ground, but also hideously expensive. I am more than prepared to wait until it drops from its current thousands of dollars to a more reasonable amount in the lower hundreds before I am even prepared to think about acquiring it.

That should also give the software companies more than enough time, I would hope, to iron out any problems in the software packages that go with the hardware!

[heinz-oz]

I can only second Ken's sentiments. The quality I currently get from my MiniDV tapes, edited in MSP8 and burned to DVD in mpeg2 is such that I would think twice about forking out more money to jump to the latest technology without knowing if it is the one to survive. Don't forget, there is a war on between the different HD camps. Unless that is decided and the hardware costs have come down to acceptable levels, I'm not even wasting a thought on it. I only got a dual layer DVD burner by default, it just happened to be dual layer. I would not have forked out extra money to get one. Had it for around two years I guess but have yet to burn a DL disk. My projects are usually around the 1 hour mark, no need for that and DL disks, as far as I'm concerned, are still to pricey to be considered.

[sjj1805]

The difference in quality is in the recording. The High Definition camcorders record more lines per inch. A first generation MPG file - providing you haven't gone overboard with your compression - should appear as good as the DV file.

I have watched a few of my Home Movies (standard definition) on my sons 48" monster sized TV screen and they were crystal clear.

[neonbob]

well.... others have their opinions, and that i respect, but i also tend to disagree with the idea of holding off on HD. I have the Sony hi def HC3 cam and it is a world of difference. There is absolutely no comparison between dv and hd... hd simply blows dv away. And you can now burn REAL hd-dvd's at about the same price as a regular dvd.

It is not cheap to get into, but it is well worth it.

As for rendering and burning DV as HD... it is clearer than what you would normally be used to, but not good enough to compare to real HD. The upscaled dv has a kind of fuzz of fog to it if you will.... not worth going to the trouble of upscaling.

[GeorgeW]

Maybe a daft question but here goes.

I have a Sony PC101 and use Videostudio 10 Plus and capture my footage on MiniDV.

When creating a DVD I always use HQ to create my movie, however, even this is compressed from its original DV format. With the advent of Hi-Def, if I was to try to create a HD-DVD from this footage could I get an improved quality picture or do I need to invest in a hi-def camera.

Like I say, may be a daft question.

thanks

Just to be clear -- when you capture the footage from your camcorder, what type of file do you end up with on your computer Is it a dv .avi file, or something else?

And which HQ template do you use (and did you modify any of the settings -- especially bitrate)?

Regards,
George

[jchunter]

With the advent of Hi-Def, if I was to try to create a HD-DVD from this [DV] footage could I get an improved quality picture or do I need to invest in a hi-def camera.

If you transcode standard definition video into high definition you will not see any more detail than was on the original tape. You need to buy a hi def camcorder. The Sony HDR-HC3 is very compact and high quality. See review at http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/So ... Review.htm

The HC3 video is quite editable with Video Studio 10+. See HD Tutorial at http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic.php?t=13872

Affordable high definition camcorders will be 2 years old next summer - a bit long in the tooth, already.

[heinz-oz]

Here is another review http://www.cnet.com.au/camcorders/camco ... 188,00.htm

[maddrummer3301]

.

[heinz-oz]

Don't believe too much of such media hype myself. Fell for that when looking for a MiniDV cam with AV pass through. Had a Panasonic DA1 at the time which didn't support that. Went for the GS 400 3CCD Panasonic and am happy with it. Color reproduction is heaps better than what it was with the DA1, the picture is not quite as clear though. The DA1 had a larger chip you see . In those days HD wasn't as popular and I did not even want to go down that track then. The GS 400 set me back over 2 grand australian already.

I'm not likely to buy a HD TV set anytime soon and do not want to spend money now on a HD cam that will be outdated by the time I might, just because if gives me a crisper picture in SD.

[neonbob]

Heinz,
A quote from that article is one of the reasons I've been interested in that cam.

.

It's nothing short of an oustanding cam! I bought it when it first came out (paid the "new equipment" price for it too... ouch!). But it was worth it boy! It's easy to use, fairly compact, comes with a whole bunch of little goodies like auto lens cover, Pastel mode, negative art mode, old movie mode, mosiac mode... lots of others. The night vision is really cool too... The ir lighting will allow you to shoot in pitch black... just like on the Survivor tv show. And the picture quality is still something I have a hard believing when I watch.

I paid a high price for it... and I am not complaining AT ALL!!

[jchunter]

editing HD-Mpeg2 on a 2.8Ghz HT machine is like editing SD-Mpeg2 on a Pentium 3 @500Mhz.
.

Not true at all.
Lest another internet legend get started, editing HDV on Video Studio 10+ is remarkably smooth with my ancient 3GHz P4 HT.