VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 25 of 25
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Slovakia
    Search Comp PM
    Hi. I have some video, that I captured from my home camera and saved on my computer in avi format, video in dvsd (Digital Video Sony or something like that) and audio in uncompressed PCM. 37min video has over 8,5 GBG and I want to comprime it to fit on DVD5. What format should I prefer - I want to be able to play that video on standalone dvd player. Which format is better? Mpeg2 or DivX, or something else? I know, that there is no exact answer, but what would you advise me?

    Thanks
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2004
    Location: Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    I'd use MPeg2 720x576i (keep it interlaced bottom field first) at 8Mb/s if you want PCM audio or 9Mb/s if you want AC3 audio. At that bit rate, CBR and VBR perfrom about the same.

    If you author the DVD, this will play on any DVD player.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Canada
    Search Comp PM
    37 minutes of avi to DVD format will take only fraction of disc to fill.
    DVD is mpeg2, all players will play that, if your player can play DivX, than you can use that too. In that case it will fit on CD.

    edDV posted while I was typing, beat me to it
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2004
    Location: Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    You can use the bit rate calculator to check for ideal bit rates for diffferent play times and audio settings. See http://www.videohelp.com/calc


    For hand held DV camcorder material, I'd try to keep the average bit rate over 8Mb/s.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Slovakia
    Search Comp PM
    thanks for replies... sorry for many questions, but which format is better quality at the same bitrate - divx, or mpeg? then, what divx format use (divx4, 5 or whatever) and then, what container to use, is avi ok?
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member SingSing's Avatar
    Join Date: Apr 2001
    Location: U.S.A.
    Search Comp PM
    DVD Mpeg2 is a standard format.

    Divx is not.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member
    Join Date: Sep 2007
    Location: Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Divx/Xvid will generally offer better compression than MPEG2, but at that bitrate ~8000kb/s for SD frame size, you will not be able to tell the difference between the two. You would only be able to tell the difference at a lower bitrate or larger frame size at that bitrate

    I would use DVD-Video and author a DVD, because not all DVD players are DivX capable, so for compatibility reasons this makes sense

    Also not very many hardware can handle interlaced DivX very well, and if you want to use a high quality quality deinterlacer through software (avisynth) methods this takes a long, long, long, time. Conversely, DVD players are set up to handle interlaced content and do so very smoothly. Since your source DV material is interlaced, I would follow edDV's instructions in post #2, rather than go through some tedious deinterlacing process to get a progressive DivX video.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Greetings Supreme2k's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2003
    Location: Right Here, Right Now
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by SingSing
    DVD Mpeg2 is a standard format.

    Divx is not.
    It's getting there

    Or rather, the hardware technology is catching up. Between the iPod (and other portables) and Multimedia appliances like the WD TV, all formats will soon be "standard'.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member SingSing's Avatar
    Join Date: Apr 2001
    Location: U.S.A.
    Search Comp PM
    If your intention is to show the video, then mpeg2 in DVD can't be beat.

    Meg2 in DVD can be plays by computers, laptops, game consoles plus portable players, set top players, portable and built-in car players.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2004
    Location: Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    If these are important family legacy videos save and protect the original tapes. At some point you will want to preserve the original quality DV format to a long term archive. DVD-R will only save 20 min of original DV per DVD-5.

    MPeg2 576i DVD is the most universal playback standard and can serve as a secondary backup.

    Divx/xvid have value for sharing over the internet but the necessary deinterlace will reduce quality substantially.

    If this weren't a family legacy and just a movie copied from TV, then you could process an acceptable divx/xvid at lower bit rate.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Slovakia
    Search Comp PM
    thanks for all replies. just one more question - i am going to convert my videos into standard DVD-Video format, to be able to play it on portable dvd players, but is it good solution as only backup of these videos and good quality for possible future editing?
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member PuzZLeR's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Toronto Canada
    Search Comp PM
    As for "standard", it's all relative, but the least common denominator today is indeed MPEG-2 and DvD. Where DivX/Xvid play you can also expect playback of MPEG-2. Keep in mind, these are lossy formats - you will lose information from the source forever after conversion.

    As for compression, MPEG-4 based DivX/Xvid fare better - smaller file sizes for the same quality. But, given a higher bitrate, even one as low as 5000kbps will make no real difference with SD content, particularly with a good MPEG-2 encoder.

    And, IMO, you don't want to be encoding to MPEG-4 based codecs with your precious wares unless you intend on keeping the source.

    I say keep the source. If you do keep the source, then it doesn't matter what you encode to as long as it fits your playback objectives. If things change in the future (as they always seem to do from my experience) you can always go back to the source and redo/recover it. I have particularly made it a habit for added peace of mind to keep all (edited) source from now on as "Masters".

    Having said that, I can recommend DivX then if it's for just personal playback. Save space then with the lower bitrates. If you are distributing to family and friends, and assuming they're not proficient in the science of codecs, I say use DvD (MPEG-2).
    I hate VHS. I always did.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2004
    Location: The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lehoczky
    but is it good solution as only backup of these videos and good quality for possible future editing?
    As mentioned already keep your original tapes or whatever they were first recorded on. That way you can always go back to reencode in the future if you so desire.

    But yes the most universal format for standard definition is dvd mpeg2 as has already been mentioned. As long as you conform to the specs for your region you will be able to play them on any player - as long as that player likes the media - some recordable media is better than others. And really really old dvd players may like + or -r discs better but it should not be a factor on any more recent player.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2004
    Location: Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lehoczky
    thanks for all replies. just one more question - i am going to convert my videos into standard DVD-Video format, to be able to play it on portable dvd players, but is it good solution as only backup of these videos and good quality for possible future editing?
    I'll try to respond a different way.

    For important family videos you need to protect the master DV format. It contains the most information but takes the greatest file size. This is similar to the negative of a photo. It doesn't matter if you can see a difference in picture quality, future software will see much more detail in DV than MPeg2 or Divx.

    Saving only MPeg2 or divx is like saving the print and buring the higher quality negative.

    You can save the original on DV tape or in 20min segments as data on DVDR.or as a hard disk file Tapes should last ten or more years depending on storage conditions (cool and dry). Then they should be copied to fresh tape or other media.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Slovakia
    Search Comp PM
    I see, that I should backup original files... Original video tapes are overwritten many times, I have only uncompressed and big (8 GB) video avi files. Can I burn it on double layer DVD? Or is it less reliable as normal (DVD5) DVD?
    Quote Quote  
  16. Greetings Supreme2k's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2003
    Location: Right Here, Right Now
    Search Comp PM
    I just upload all my stuff to Youtube. that way, I know that it will always be there and in the best quality.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Slovakia
    Search Comp PM
    so is burned DVD5 as reliable as DVD9?
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member LJB's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2007
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    With the price of portable hardrives going down, why not store the original source material on a portable HD, as well as the original media material.
    Use the HD as a source to edit and encode as desired.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Slovakia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by LJB
    With the price of portable hardrives going down, why not store the original source material on a portable HD, as well as the original media material.
    Use the HD as a source to edit and encode as desired.
    thanks for advice, but I would prefer optical media.. but my question is, is burned single layer DVD as reliable as double layer DVD? Or should I split my files on more single layer dvds?
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2004
    Location: Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lehoczky
    Originally Posted by LJB
    With the price of portable hardrives going down, why not store the original source material on a portable HD, as well as the original media material.
    Use the HD as a source to edit and encode as desired.
    thanks for advice, but I would prefer optical media.. but my question is, is burned single layer DVD as reliable as double layer DVD? Or should I split my files on more single layer dvds?
    I haven't heard of any longevity studies for single vs. dual layer optical media.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  21. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2003
    Location: dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    The second layer is suspect for long-term archiving.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Member
    Join Date: Nov 2004
    Location: Las Vegas
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lehoczky
    ...is burned single layer DVD as reliable as double layer DVD?
    First, I should at least mention that using high quality media and properly caring for the burned media are bigger factors in longevity/reliability than whether you use single layer or dual layer media.

    Second, as edDV pointed out, there aren't scientific studies available that compare dual layer to single layer...and even in the existing studies of single layer media, there is some debate about how accurately the accelerated aging methods used are mimicking aging as it occurs in the real world. I can tell you that dual layer dvds which I burned years ago are still perfectly fine, single layer dvds I burned going back years before that have no apparent degradation, and cds burned years before that can still be read perfectly. Until something starts actually failing, it's pretty hard to tell how long any of them are going to last (with any certainty). From what I've seen so far, it looks like the drives to read them will become obsolete and disappear before the disks go bad.

    Finally, to answer your question-

    Considering that:
    -the reflectivity for dual layer is 18%-30% versus 45%-80% for single layer...
    -reflectivity is a key factor in how easily/accurately the drive can read the data on the disk...
    -the ability to accurately read the disk is a determining factor in reliability...
    the single layer would actually appear to have an advantage over dual layer. I would (and do) still use dual layer media, though, if the material is too large for a single layer disk.
    Quote Quote  
  23. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2003
    Location: dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Using dual-layer for final product is fine. Using single layer for the archiving of the data (to re-author with later, if needed) is wise.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Member PuzZLeR's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Toronto Canada
    Search Comp PM
    When archiving source, who cares which media format's lifespan is longer? (ex: R vs DL or even 3.5 vs 5.25 before then)

    You're going to be migrating your content to newer, better, formats long before any estimated expiration date is reached on older formats anyway.
    I hate VHS. I always did.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2003
    Location: dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    People who care about their source files will care about the media used.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads