Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > DVD Video > DVD Making Methods, Data Quality Question

Reply
Thread Tools

DVD Making Methods, Data Quality Question

 
 
sbt
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-22-2007
In article <(E-Mail Removed). com>, Cori
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Mar 22, 11:38 am, Gene E. Bloch <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > These two methods are almost equivalent. However, the two devices
> > (ADVC, DVD recorder) will have different qualities of digitization. Try
> > them and see what you like best.

>
> Bob, THANKS for the information! It wasn't what I asked, but as it
> happens I do want to incorporate still images into some of my DVDs.
>
> Bill, someone else told me the Canopus would be higher quality and
> certainly on any footage I plan to edit, it has to get into the
> computer somehow. It's just that the Canopus seemed like an extra
> step if I have already transferred the same footage to digital via the
> Zenith. If the Canopus really is better, though, I shouldn't take
> chances on quality even despite the extra trouble.
>
> Gene, thanks for sharing your genius.
>


Cori:

Going from VHS to computer via the Canopus because you wish to do
additional editing will result in (possibly much) higher quality than
using the Zenith to encode and then doing a Canopus transfer, because
the conversion to digital in the Zenith includes a lossy compression to
MPEG-2, followed by an analog-to-digital transfer to your Mac (it
doesn't matter whether the content is stored in a digital or analog
form if you're going to use an analog output on the digital content!),
followed by another lossy compression after you do your editing.

What you need to be concerned with is doing as little as possible to
degrade your content on the path from original source to final product.
The more times you compress and the more times you have an analog
device in the loop, the more quality you lose.

So:

Assuming that you are limited by having originally analog (VHS)
content, your least damaging path is to have only one analog transfer
and one compression.

Thus, if you don't need to edit, either "all-in-the-Zenith" or VHS to
computer via ADVC followed by authoring on the Mac are roughly
equivalent "least loss" processes -- it just depends on which has the
best MPEG encoder.

If you do need to edit, VHS to computer via ADVC, followed by editing
(iMovie, Final Cut, etc) and authoring (iDVD, DVD Studio Pro, Toast,
etc) are going to be your "least loss" solution.

It really isn't difficult to figure this stuff out so long as you
remember that the more you muck with analog and the more often you
compress, the worse off you are.

--
Spenser
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Cori
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-23-2007
On Mar 22, 3:00 pm, sbt <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Going from VHS to computer via the Canopus because you wish to do
> additional editing will result in (possibly much) higher quality than
> using the Zenith to encode and then doing a Canopus transfer,


Well, I assumed I wouldn't have to transfer to another form, once it
was on DVD, because a DVD can be played in the computer. The way I
transfer analog data with the Canopus is by using capture mode, then
feeding the captured material into the computer. I'm just asking if
material converted through the Canopus is of better quality than
material burned onto the Zenith, or no difference.

> Thus, if you don't need to edit, either "all-in-the-Zenith" or VHS to
> computer via ADVC followed by authoring on the Mac are roughly
> equivalent "least loss" processes -- it just depends on which has the
> best MPEG encoder.


> Spenser


How do I learn specs on the encoders? The Canopus manual is a piece
of worthless junk and I never learned anything about what it does or
how to use it except by going on the forums. The Zenith manual is
pretty detailed. Thanks for any indications.

Cori

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
iBallooka
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-23-2007
On 2007-03-23 08:19:01 +0000, "Cori" <(E-Mail Removed)> said:

> On Mar 22, 3:00 pm, sbt <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Going from VHS to computer via the Canopus because you wish to do
>> additional editing will result in (possibly much) higher quality than
>> using the Zenith to encode and then doing a Canopus transfer,

>
> Well, I assumed I wouldn't have to transfer to another form, once it
> was on DVD, because a DVD can be played in the computer. The way I
> transfer analog data with the Canopus is by using capture mode, then
> feeding the captured material into the computer. I'm just asking if
> material converted through the Canopus is of better quality than
> material burned onto the Zenith, or no difference.
>
>> Thus, if you don't need to edit, either "all-in-the-Zenith" or VHS to
>> computer via ADVC followed by authoring on the Mac are roughly
>> equivalent "least loss" processes -- it just depends on which has the
>> best MPEG encoder.

>
>> Spenser

>
> How do I learn specs on the encoders? The Canopus manual is a piece
> of worthless junk and I never learned anything about what it does or
> how to use it except by going on the forums. The Zenith manual is
> pretty detailed. Thanks for any indications.
>
> Cori


The Canopus manual is not needed other than to show connections, once
connected. all it does then is to simply transfer data from place to
another digitally or analogue, the software on the computer then deals
with this information in a manner you have set to do...

What you do with the data once transferred to your computer is entirely
dependent on what the end use is and your skill levels...

Your using a very simple and basic VHS/DVD system and your importing
from this it seems "movies" via the Canapos into your computer, if so
then the old maxim kicks in "garbage in garbage out" If the original
material is of low resolution/quality and the simple fact its VHS means
it is when compared with modern day digital then all you ever can hope
to achieve is "tweaking" round the edges...

If your hardware and skill levels are sufficient then excellent results
can be achieved all you need to do is invest time and money, if your
unwilling or unable to do this then saying a manual is piece of junk
will not help you in gaining information, even more so when the Canapos
is the perfect choice to achieve what you want to achieve...

If your not satisfied with simply putting in a VHS tape and copying
over to DVD within the Zenith, then ask for alternatives, some have
been given, video editing, codecs and DVD authoring are all very steep
learning curves to do "properly" and hardware/software demands are high
and expensive...Apple has iDVD and iMovie as a bridge but again to get
the best from either you have to invest time in reading the
information...

And there are several free software packages available online which
will probably meet you needs...

Mike
--
Peace and Happiness is a State of Mind....

 
Reply With Quote
 
Bill Vermillion
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-23-2007
In article <(E-Mail Removed). com>,
Cori <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Mar 22, 11:38 am, Gene E. Bloch <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> These two methods are almost equivalent. However, the two devices
>> (ADVC, DVD recorder) will have different qualities of digitization. Try
>> them and see what you like best.

>
>Bob, THANKS for the information! It wasn't what I asked, but as it
>happens I do want to incorporate still images into some of my DVDs.
>
>Bill, someone else told me the Canopus would be higher quality and
>certainly on any footage I plan to edit, it has to get into the
>computer somehow. It's just that the Canopus seemed like an extra
>step if I have already transferred the same footage to digital via the
>Zenith. If the Canopus really is better, though, I shouldn't take
>chances on quality even despite the extra trouble.


The ADVC units do a lot of extra processing - including having
a TBC [Time Base Corrector] to make pictures stable, 3D noise
reduction [compares previous and next frame for noise reduction]
and other goodies such as being able to change colors to some
degree, sharpness, contrast, etc. Good units if you do a lot to be
able to amortized the costs over many transfers.

They used to have some interesting comparisons with before/after
images making old tapes look really good. Those don't appear to be
there anymore. The Canpous product is probably a bit more than
you need/can handle given the questions you have posted here
before.

Tranfering from VHS to digital via the Zenith is a low-cost method
- while the Canopus lines the ADVC110 and ADVC300 are the low-end
of the Canopus offerings - and the 300 fits into the pro-sumer mode
- that is a high end consumer or low end pro device.

Bill

--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Making new Flavors : Making a custom transferhandler for and drop applications ebby83@gmail.com Java 5 01-12-2005 11:10 AM
DVD-R & DVD-RW & DVD+R & DVD+RW DVD-WTF Nozza Computer Support 5 12-02-2004 10:06 PM
Digicam Video Quality vs. Camcorders, Camcorder Image Quality vs Digicams Richard Lee Digital Photography 16 08-23-2004 06:04 PM
Bigger image size and lower quality vs. Smaller image size and higher quality Desmond Digital Photography 5 09-27-2003 04:08 AM
THE Difference Between Good Quality and Poor Quality Pictures! N.E.1. Digital Photography 4 09-23-2003 02:43 AM



Advertisments