704 vs. 720 burn to DVD

[brstephe]

My main issue is video quality. Granted, this is my first go at trying to produce a real DVD of a home movie from a new camcorder (Pany SDR-H200). I'm getting stuck in analyzing variables that *may* degrade my final DVD. I realize garbage in is garbage out. The clips I'm working with were pulled in from the cam via bundled Imagemixer. They were shot in SP 16:9 mode. They're .mod on the cam and mpg saved on hard drive. I *believe* them to be MPEG-2, 704x480, 16:9, VBR 4.7M/Max 9.542Mb, Dolby Digital... only because this is what Powerdirector or Ulead show as file properties.

The 704x480 throws me off. I'm doing nothing more than putting these 6 clips into a timeline and then burning them to DVD. Obviously a menu is added. The only pertinant selections in Powerdirector during burn phase profile selection is DVD HQ, DVD LP, DVD SP. In looking at the profile settings, which are *not* editable, everything burns as 720x480. HQ looks to be the best bitrate. I've been using this with bad results. It's not terrible but a bit grainy. Is it ok to burn with 720x480 settings or will you get better results if you use the format of the input, i.e. 704x280? Is it possible that I can never get a good burn or DVD with original files being MPEG-2 SP Mode bitrate? I've since changed the camera settings to XP mode, which I believe ups me from 4.7Mbps to 7 or 10Mbps... which I think should help. Am I losing anything in this differential between 704 and 720 and should I "go advanced" as I've read elsewhere and use another program to insert these 16 pixels? Another confusing point to me is that since I've not edited my timeline mpg's, why am I rendering and encoding *everything* on final burn? Most software like powerdirector and ulead have the means of skipping this when dealing with original unaltered media. Am I rendering and encoding in full because of this 704 upconvert to DVD 720.... thus making my final product less than good quality?

Appreciate some dialogue. Realize this is less than unclear.

[dphirschler]

If it is 16x9, then you have to go 720x480. 704 does not do widescreen.


Darryl

[jman98]

Wow. This is a really good post from a new member. Most new members post things like "My DVD doesn't work. Why is that?" with no information at all on what they are doing.

I don't use PowerDirector and Ulead. In fact, the way I make DVDs is NOT something I would recommend (I use Scenarist), but I do have a lot of control over the final bit rate because I encode my videos to whatever bit rate I choose before I author them. Sounds to me like PowerDirector is probably an encoding/authoring tool in one to make it easy for less experienced users to use it. Don't worry about the difference between 704 and 720 It's not important. dphirschler may be right that you have to use 720x480 for widescreen. You definitely can't do anythingx280 as that's not valid for DVD.

If your final video is not too big to fit on a single layer DVD, there is no reason to re-encode it, although some easy to use authoring tools just do that as a matter of recourse. DVDAuthorGUI is free and some people like it and it won't re-encode your video. Perhaps it will work for you.

[jagabo]

If it is 16x9, then you have to go 720x480. 704 does not do widescreen.

Really? Is that a DVD spec issue? One can certainly make an 704x480 16:9 MPG file.

[brstephe]

Nice timely and informative replies Darryl and Jman, much appreciated. I don't understand Darry's response "
If it is 16x9, then you have to go 720x480. 704 does not do widescreen." If I setup my cam to natively capture 16:9 and I get that onto my hard drive as MPEG-2 704x480 how does this makes sense, especially if the properties show 16:9? Is it possible that my file properties are actually not correct when viewing them? Is there a freeware app out there to use that will tell me detailed file property parameters?

Perhaps I shouldn't even be doing 16:9 off the cam. Would I be better suited to shooting 4:3 and converting this to widescreen through the process of edit/produce/authoring (expand to fit, stretch, etc)? Or perhaps just doing everything 4:3, burning to DVD, and letting my wide screen TV do the stretch/fit without letterbox? Given the data I've given you so far, just tell me what you'd do to replicate what came off of the cam onto a DVD in the best possible quality way... without menus, titles, transitions and crap to eliminate variables.

Regarding encoding, I appreciate the freeware GUI suggestion but would like something more "canned" out of the box for the consumer/intermediate user. Ulead definitely has more advanced burn profile settings than Powerdirector does. It even has a 704x480 profile that I could use and this is what really prompted my thread. Why use this sucker instead of the 720x480 when burning. Am I doing more harm to video quality by upconverting a 704 to 720 burn or doing more harm to video quality by using the 704x480 profile? You've got me.

I'm starting to think more and more that MPEG-2 hard drive cam was definitely a mistake. Perhaps I'm just looking at this too deep. Relative of mine is extremely deep into video editing and tells me my output to DVD from 3ccd cam, even in MPEG-2 4.7Mbps SD mode off the cam, should be just as good if not better than his miniDV Sony Professional cam. Perhaps I need to take this thing back and go with a miniDV capable of native .avi? Or just scrap this widescreen stuff and just use it on an old clunky 32" Analog 4:3?

[edDV]

Nice timely and informative replies Darryl and Jman, much appreciated. I don't understand Darry's response "
If it is 16x9, then you have to go 720x480. 704 does not do widescreen." If I setup my cam to natively capture 16:9 and I get that onto my hard drive as MPEG-2 704x480 how does this makes sense, especially if the properties show 16:9? Is it possible that my file properties are actually not correct when viewing them? Is there a freeware app out there to use that will tell me detailed file property parameters?

Try GSPOT http://gspot.headbands.com/ and screencap/post the result.

704x480 is similar to DTV SD and is valid 4:3 or wide. It also is a valid DVD format if your encoder/authoring software supports it.

I think dphirschler is thinking about 352x480 (half 704 width) which is not supported in wide format in the DVD spec.

Since you are shooting in MPeg2 format, why recode at all? Power DVD may be the problem here if it forces a recode. So long as your MPeg2 bitrate is within DVD spec, just import and author.

I'm starting to think more and more that MPEG-2 hard drive cam was definitely a mistake. Perhaps I'm just looking at this too deep. Relative of mine is extremely deep into video editing and tells me my output to DVD from 3ccd cam, even in MPEG-2 4.7Mbps SD mode off the cam, should be just as good if not better than his miniDV Sony Professional cam. Perhaps I need to take this thing back and go with a miniDV capable of native .avi? Or just scrap this widescreen stuff and just use it on an old clunky 32" Analog 4:3?

I disagree that consumer camcorder MPeg2 is as good as MiniDV encoded to MPeg2 for quality but if you don't recode and just author it will be close. If you plan to edit and recode the results will be much worse than MiniDV.

[jagabo]

Note that TMPGEnc uses terms like "4:3 525 line (NTSC, 704x480)" because the 4:3 image in the 720x480 file is contained in the inner 704x480 portion of the frame. It doesn't mean the file itself is 704x480.

[brstephe]

OK now I'm pissed. First let me say thanks and hopefully this thread is useful for others. That GSPot program is wonderful. Between it and installing Sony Video Studio Platinum trial I'm somewhat certain that my original files noted above are 4:3 aspect. Which makes sense because I *think*, now in looking back, that was default or I had set it as such prior to any first videos on the Panasonic SDR-H200.

I've tonight imported off the cam recent footage that I KNOW was setup for 16:9 and XP mode (notch higher than SP and higher bitrate).

Strange thing is, Gspot shows these 2 files no different than above. 4:3, 704x480. Doesn't seem like the bitrate is any different either than prior videos that I KNOW were taken in LP mode.

Even stranger, if I look at the default Imagemixer bundled program information for all files imported to date, all pertinant info is IDENTICAL. 16:9, MPEG-2, bitrate.... everything except the file size, length, etc. And I know some were LP mode, some SP, and some XP on the cam settings.

So now I've got a real problem on my hands. What are the chances GSpot is reporting incorrect? What are the chances the Panasonic SDR-H200 doesn't in fact suport 16:9? What if that piece of junk Imagemixer is importing my cam .MOD files and incorrectly? What are the chances I get a good answer or resolution if calling Panasonic?

Help! I tried importing off the cam from within Powerdirector but the cam is not recognized. I'll try Sony 8.0c next. Or look for a .MOD to MPEG-2 import utility that imports pure for testing? It's time to vindicate this cam or it's going back. Surely if it's advertised 16:9 capable it should be??

[jagabo]

Make sure GSpot is set up for Full File Scan. That way it will scan the MPG files to determine the actual average bitrate. Otherwise it will only report the bitrate indicated in the header -- often the max bitrate.

Options -> Settings -> Enable Full File Scan...

As for aspect ratio: open your MPG files in a player that supports automatic MPG aspect ratio scaling. See if they look right. If not, overide the AR and see if they look better. Try VLC, MPC, KMPlayer...

[brstephe]

Yea, now I'm really worried. I had full scan on already by default. All programs, including Womble and KMPLayer show this thing as 4:3. Arghhh. Has to be a problem or Panasonic has done some false advertising. I know there's no way to mess up the cam settings as it's either one or the other 16:9 or 4:3. Jagabo, do you have a recommended piece of test software that I could use to grab .MOD files off the cam hard drive to eliminate Imagemixer import as the culprit?

[jagabo]

I hear just renaming MOD files to MPG often works.

[brstephe]

Yes, it does. And for the record of this thread which I hadn't seen anywhere else, a directy hard drive copy of the .MOD over to my PC is the exact same size of the imported Imagemixer .mpg. I've run several captures and tests and when producing 4:3 and 16:9 they both look *OK*. Not great. Not much difference at all between the 2. Just bugs me that I just don't know for certain if this cam captures 16:9. Producing and changing any settings has little effect on the burn so I'll call Panasonic tomorrow. If there we a discernable difference in any of this or real data to show differentiation in capture mode or aspect ratio I'd feel alot better. If Pany doesn't have alot to say I'm looking for a new cam. Surely for $600 I can fing something similar if not better *and* feel good about the logic behind the outcome(s) of simple dvd burns. Just still feels like *if* this thing were working as advertised I'd be seeing true 16:9 at better quality. Maybe I was expecting too much of a 3ccd HDD cam.

Wonder if all of this is a new-found thing with HDD cams? I originally posted here, https://forum.videohelp.com/topic330035.html, which seems to me like the exact same issue with a Sony. Looks like this user resolved or settled with what he had, possibly unkowning of potential upside quality. I will not.

[jagabo]

Do the objects within the videos appear correct when displayed at 4:3 and 16:9? For example, film a ball (sphere) in both 4:3 and 16:9 modes. When properly displayed the ball should be perfectly round on the screen. Does the 4:3 recording look right with a 4:3 AR on the computer? Does the 16:9 recording look right with a 16:9 AR on the computer? If so, they are working correctly.

Some camcorders' 16:9 mode is simply 4:3 with the top and bottom masked, leaving a 16:9 picture in the middle of the 4:3 frame.

[dphirschler]

https://www.videohelp.com/dvd

16:9 Anamorphic (only supported by 720x480)

Darryl

[dphirschler]

Yea, now I'm really worried. I had full scan on already by default. All programs, including Womble and KMPLayer show this thing as 4:3. Arghhh. Has to be a problem or Panasonic has done some false advertising. I know there's no way to mess up the cam settings as it's either one or the other 16:9 or 4:3. Jagabo, do you have a recommended piece of test software that I could use to grab .MOD files off the cam hard drive to eliminate Imagemixer import as the culprit?

Take a close look at the video. Look for a circle (like the moon or a clock) and see if it is compressed. The video will still be 704x480 (or 720x480) even if it was shot "widescreen". If you truely shot widescreen footage, then it just compressed it horizontally to fit the 704x480 frame. The TV will stretch the image wide when it see the "widescreen" flag.

But if you want to make a widescreen DVD, I believe you will need to make it 720x480. Try this AviSynth script. You may have to modify the first line depending on your source.

vid=directShowSource("myvideo.mpg")
vid=vid.addBorders(8,0,8,0)
return vid

Darryl

[bbills]

brstephe, I own the exact same camera and have been making DVD's from the start, recording in XP, Widescreen mode. I am using Imagemixer to import from the camera and Ulead Video Studio 11 to edit and author DVD. In Ulead peform your edits, when your finished click on "Share" and then "Create Video File". Now choose "Same As First Video Clip", this will render your video without re-encoding. When Authoring a DVD in Ulead Add your movie then click the Project Settings icon at the bottom of the screen. Make sure the "Do Not Convert Compliant MPEG Files" is checked. Now Ulead will author the DVD without re-encoding your video. I hope this helps you out. It's a great camera, the only drawback I had was the way it names video clips but i found a batch file-renamer that took care of that.

[brstephe]

All, thanks for the helpful replies. I'm getting there. I think the pace of your replies is aligned to where I'm at and headed. I'm starting to like Vegas platinum. I definitely know that Imagemixer DOES NOT correctly set the 16:9 widescreen flag so I've used SDCopy for that purpose. I know in several other threads I've found that this authors file regardless, but I like it correct as it should be. The file is definitely 704 as well as seen through many programs and GSpot. I may give the Ulead product a try, but before I do...

1) bbill, are you losing anything in quality when you do this? I mean the upconvert from 704 to 720 has to have some effect? How can this render without re-encoding if in fact we're going from 704 to 720 for default DVD? I haven't yet stretched to fit to see what effect this has.

2) Is there a way to accomplish the same within Vegas? I've tried 'Render As' and just don't have it licked quite yet. Akin to point 1, if I try to force a hard 704 template/profile I'm not having any luck. If I use the default NTSC DV Wide 720x40 I just *feel* as if I'm losing some quality as all Profiles I've tried so far re-encode.

3) Note that when I plop my media into the timeline and change the project settings to 704 it fits into preview perfect. If I change project properties to 720 it letterboxes 8 and 8 on each side.

4) I'm beginning to think that rendering this "manually", i.e. Render As is useless. Unless I can find a way within Vegas to render this without re-encoding. I haven't edited any of the actual timeline mpgs, just put in a few transitions. That's it. Perhaps I should just follow the Make Movie wizard and let the defaults take over. If I were assured that this would be the best possibly quality anyway, it would make all the other customizations I'm probably overthinking useless. This process renders anyway, albeit the original timeline mpg's to temp folder .mpgs on the way to DVD Architect for burn... albeit a complete rendering with nothing smartly skipped.

I like that you've got this working to satisfaction bbill. I feel better but have a gut that I can improve quality here somewhere. And don't want to have to use Ulead if possible. Any Vegas officianado's following here that might have thoughts?

[bbills]

brstephe, I'm not losing any quality because the process is not re-encoding the video. By selecting "Same as first video clip" Ulead is using the parameters for the source video therefore no re-encoding is necessary. The resulting video is the same as the source, 704x480, 16x9, VBR 9542kbs. Hope this helps...

[brstephe]

It does... greatly. Now to figure out how to accomplish the same in Vegas. Rendering is definitely taking a LONG time so I'll have to image it's re-encoding. I'm downloading Ulead trial as we speak for comparison in quality.

[brstephe]

bbills & all, We're getting there. I can use Ulead to render a file lickety split. However, my burn to DVD with "Do Not Convert Compliant MPEG" is a complete unknown. I can't tell on the progress indicator whether or not I'm re-encoding or not. The creation of title segment, even without any titles or menus, is taking over 10 minutes. Dissapointing here, as even if I weren't re-encoding and this were working as it should I'd never put up with that.

Which brings me back full circle to Vegas. Hoping a Vegas resource can post reply. It seems that everything I try in Vegas while rendering re-encodes. I've read that Vegas Pro will show "No recompression" or something to that effect upon a black preview when rendering optimized, but I get no such indication in Vegas Platinum. I've also read that Vegas for most intent always re-encodes MPEG-2. Is this true or is there a way around? I've not edited anything and rendering takes a long time. My test scenarios are original 1 minute .mpg file dropped onto timeline, nothing more. Project settings were auto-detected to a Custom (704x480, 29.970 fps) Upper Field NTSC DV Widescreen. In everything I try the frame count bottom right just counts upward at the same rate. I'd sure like to get Vegas working as it's the best software that I've been trialing. Suppose I could use Womble or VirtualDub or something here, but I really want to get Vegas working and can't post to their support on a trial package. Help please!

[bbills]

brstephe, how long is your video? In Ulead, during the authoring process it will tell you if the software is encoding video. If the process jumps directly to de-multiplexing video then the software is not re-encoding video. If your video is long I can see it taking at least ten minutes, if not longer depending on the speed of your PC.