best camcorder for best dvd results

[syeager]

This is a pretty general question that might not have a clear answer.

I want to buy a new camcorder. My minidv camera is unsatisfactory. I have looked at its results after capturing with kino in linux and it is marginal to bad. Forget looking at it on a hdtv, where it looks absolutely bad. It captures at 720x480 but it looks bad with lots of choppy vertical edges. It's like it was actually capturing at 360 or 352 wide. It just looks bad. Maybe another minidv would be better - maybe not. I have looked at some inexpensive hd cameras, but many looked better, but when I tried to convert from 1280x720 to 720x480, it looks almost worse than the camera that captures at 720x480. Many details are lost and even less crisp.

Now, would it be better to capture in HD using a nice Canon camcorder, then convert its video to sd for burning to a dvd, or find a good SD camera that captures well in native DVD resolution? I have looked at a couple of harddrive and flash drive sd camcorders using mpeg2 compression and they look bad. Very blocky and poor focus. I was looking at Samsung's MX20, but have heard some confusing reviews. I could get a HD camera, but they are expensive, require more computer than I have (my computer will work, but it will tax it for sure), and I am not ready to move to blueray yet. No one I know owns a blueray player, so I cannot share my video with them except on dvd.

What experiences have others had and what recommendations can you make?

[zoobie]

I think HDV cams have fallen to around $500-600 US
You can shoot HDV then export DV
I recommend reading www.camcorderinfo.com

[dun4cheap]

I have 2 Canon HV20's and 1 HV30. I shoot exclusively in HDV and edit in HDV. I use Avid Liquid7 and sometimes Studio 11. Both these programs will let you edit an HDV timeline and with a click of a button you can export that timeline to DVD with excellent results. I know most editing software allows this now. What is unique with HD footage is you can actually pan and zoom on it if you are exporting it to SD.

Anyhow, even if you decide to use say a Canon HV20 and record to the minidv in DV format instead of HDV the video quality will be superb. The canon optics are awesome and the CCD lens is a true 1920x1080 cmos censor. The canon also utilizes an RGB filter and is known to do well in low light situations. Not to mention it is equipped with an optical image stabilizer. You will be extremely happy stepping up to HD.

[thecoalman]

MiniDV shares the same resolution of DVD but it has much higher bitrate, when encoded and authored to DVD correctly the results should be almost identical to what you see if you hooked the cam to the TV directly. If anything you'll see degradation because of the limits of the DVD format assuming you have some decent video. Consumer minidv cams are actually quite good so getting a decent video even from a cheap cam should not be that hard.

It captures at 720x480 but it looks bad with lots of choppy vertical edges

DV is interlaced and if you're not using software that deinterlaces it's going to look like shit on a computer especially during fast motion. Here's a cropped shot of a single frame. Note that interlaced material should not be deinterlaced when encoding.

[edDV]

It captures at 720x480 but it looks bad with lots of choppy vertical edges

DV is interlaced and if you're not using software that deinterlaces it's going to look like shit on a computer especially during fast motion. Here's a cropped shot of a single frame. Note that interlaced material should be deinterlaced when encoding.

Software deinterlace will near always be inferior to motion adaptive hardware deinterlacers found in better HDTV sets. For this reason, I'd recommend capturing, editing and encoding to 720x480i and let the TV deinterlace it.

If viewing on a computer, use a deinterlacing player.

[thecoalman]

TYPO... forgot the all important NOT! thanks Ed.

<note to self, take typing lessons>

[lordsmurf]

This sounds like you've deinterlaced a DVD version of the DV recording. Details on how you're viewing this?

[jagabo]

Software deinterlace will near always be inferior to motion adaptive hardware deinterlacers found in better HDTV sets.

There are motion adaptive deinterlacers in sofware that are better than any hardware implementations. And of course, all hardware deinterlacers are modeled in software first. But yes, there are many inferior deinterlacers around.

For this reason, I'd recommend capturing, editing and encoding to 720x480i and let the TV deinterlace it

This is true because it leaves your source intact. Deinterlacing your source will reduce temporal (unless you bob to double the frame rate) and spacial resolution forever.

[filmboss80]

Syeager, before you curse the camcorder, look at the raw, unadulterated footage it produces BEFORE capturing it to PC. Plug the camcorder directly into your TV and HDTV and look at the footage that way. It sounds like this is a capturing issue, not a camcorder issue. I would venture to guess that the actual minidv footage is a whole lot better than what you end up with after capture to PC.

[syeager]

Wow. Wonderful responses. Thank you so much.

Here are a few points I have that address much of the comments to this point:

I have looked at the results of the video by connecting the camcorder to my hdtv directly. It shows the same flaws there as on my pc.

The flaws, as I call them, are not horizontal lines, as produced by interlacing, but vertical blocky edges to things that should be rounded. It is like the object is a large ball, with gently sloping sides but the video shows a large ball with blocky edges, like a game run without antialiasing. And these are somewhat large blocky jumps, larger than 1/720th of the screen and seemingly inconsistent with the rest of the image.

Another flaw I see is when you look at a person's face when the video shows the entire person's body. The eyes are reasonable, small and devoid of any real detail, but shaped as you would expect with no real flaws. But the mouth, which is moving, looses all real distinction but instead shows a blocky rectangle around where the lips are. The eyes, being much smaller, show better detail than the mouth. It almost makes the person's mouth look like a robot. Is this a flaw of the camera, of the technology, i don't know.

And both these types of flaws are evident when the camera is connected to the tv.

I love the quality of the hdv cameras, but am not happy with the limitation of the tape media. I wish to record 2-3+ hours of video at a time. I pretty much need to move to a harddrive or flash base camera.

My question comes to how to produce good quality dvds from a camcorder. My previous attempts at using my current minidv camera do not seem to produce good enough quality and I expect it is either just too old or defective. I have tried various sd camcorders, both flash and harddrive based, and they have yet to produce better images. I tried a camera that produced 1280x720 and resized it for dvd, but the results lacked the clarity of the higher def images and in some cases, lost detail altogether (as in some small edge or wire that might have been picked up with a smaller def camera, but was very small and detailed in hd, but when resized, it was too small and was not reproduced in the smaller size video).

Is anyone going from hd to sd and producing great dvd? If so, with what and using what process? Is anyone using a sd camera and producing great dvd on a hdtv? Again, with what and how?

P.S. I love this forum. Wonderful, knowledgable, responsive. Simply the best.

[thecoalman]

What model cam to do you have? How are you connecting it to the TV?

Let me out it to you this way, high end DV cams are used for many professional productions like commercials or even low budget TV shows. You can't expect that kind of quality from a consumer cam but it won't be that far off.

So you either have a POS or you're doing something wrong.

[Soopafresh]

The flaws, as I call them, are not horizontal lines, as produced by interlacing, but vertical blocky edges to things that should be rounded. It is like the object is a large ball, with gently sloping sides but the video shows a large ball with blocky edges, like a game run without antialiasing. And these are somewhat large blocky jumps, larger than 1/720th of the screen and seemingly inconsistent with the rest of the image.

That sounds more like macroblocking as a result of the MPEG encode. See if you can give it more bitrate.

The great thing about an HD camcorder is that you have a huge image to begin with. Once you reduce it to DVD resolution, you still have a really beautiful and sharp image. Have a look at these videos - shot on an HV20 or HV30, then reduced in size for web playback http://vimeo.com/HV20/page:8

[thecoalman]

That sounds more like macroblocking as a result of the MPEG encode. See if you can give it more bitrate.

syeager, note that doesn't apply if the cam is hooked directly to the TV. If you're getting poor results hooking the cam to the TV no amount of anything will fix it. I suspect it's either not a DV cam or syeager is using the USB cable.

[syeager]

Thanks again for your responses.

I have an old JVC miniDV camera, I cannot remember the model number, but it is old and has a 16x optical zoom. It is probably about 5-6 years old.

The flaws are obvious on my hdtv as well as my pc. I am connecting to the tv using my only option with this camera, the av ports. I connect to my pc using firewire. The same flaw is on both, so it is not post processing. I know that av cables are not going to give great results, but I am capturing using kino in raw dv format and not the option to capture using mpeg compression on capture, so I should be looking at raw video footage as good as it can get.

The camera has been to the shop once as it would not eject a tape. That was repaired but who knows what else could be wrong. Or it is just bad or defective. Unless someone knows otherwise, I am assuming the camera must be replaced, but I need a suggestion as to whether to go with another sd camera or hd. And, I would prefer one that would allow for 2+hours recording and am afraid hd is just to pricey and still may not give me the best dvd quality.

I have always thought that a good sd camera, capturing at dvd resolution should be able to produce a good dvd. But it looks like I have to choose between good quality (like the canon hv20 or hv30) or expanded recording times of the hd and flash cameras. Is there not a way to get both for good dvd results?

Guys, again, I appreciate your input so much.

[thecoalman]

I'd suggest the issue is your cam, consumer models have come quite far in 6 years. The one you have probably has a very low effective resolution and is using a 1CCD sensor. A decent consumer miniDV cam will produce outstanding results for DVD.

As to the choice between miniDV or HD the HD will definitely look better than mini DV on a HD screen if the source is HD but once you convert it down to SD DVD the benefits go out the window. The other thing to consider is that HD editing is still in its infancy and there isn't a whole lot of software available.

Here's sample of really good DV from a canon GL2, you can't expect a consumer cam to produce this especially under these lighting conditions but it won't be that far off. If you spend about $500 you're going to get very close...

http://www.nepadigital.com/reencode/avidv.avi

Note there is no audio.

[jagabo]

I recommend you post a few seconds of DV AVI from your camcorder and people here will take a look.

[lordsmurf]

How big is the tv, what brand/model, how does it look on non-HD satellite/cable/antenna?