Help! Is there a "best" format to convert to?

[gsperk]

I've been doing sport & highlight videos for myself & some friends for about 6 yrs. Always used basic camcorders, Tickle & just dealt with my video quality. Now my video demands are expanding so quality is now my NUMBER ONE! My camera is Sony HDR AX2000 & I work with Sony Vegas Pro11 & Adobe AE CS5. My issue is, when people give me their DVD's to take highlights from, the formats are .VOB. Vegas & AE CS5 doesn't do well with these. So I use AVS Converter to convert the videos....works perfect. Simple, no fancy extras...just pick what you want & go. Now....HERE'S MY QUESTION: What format, codec, frame rate & all that stuff should I use? The quality isn't the greatest already. U know how regular camcorders shoot. I want to keep the quality the best it can be without losing any. Right now they are .VOB, 720x480, 9000 kbps & 29.97. Should I try to keep the parameters close to the same? Does higher bitrate matter? Sooo many options & I'm still learning with all of them. In the end, everything I do goes on DVD so I know in Sony Vegas I will have to Render in MPEG-2. But I don't want my quality messed up before I get to that point. I've been sampling multiple trials to see which is best to convert: MPEG-2, AVI, MP4, 1080, 720...changing the size, changing the bitrate....ugh! So any sdvice would be GREATLY appreciated! Again...I'm not educated yet on all these settings & don't want to experiment everytime I do a video. I would like a standard & stay consistent. Help if you can.

Thanks, gsperk

[hech54]

If your camera shoots MPEG2 then MPEG2 is as good as you are gonna get. Leave it at MPEG2, use an editor that does not re-encode edited MPEG2 (like Womble MPEG-VCR) and leave it at that. Changing codecs will not improve quality and changing framerate is just plain dumb.

[Baldrick]

Doesn't vegas support dvd mpeg2 import and smart rendering(just reencodes transitions and such)?


Another good mpeg2 editor is mpeg dvd wizard dvd. It supports dvd mpeg2 and smart rendering.

[gsperk]

Thanks for your input guys. Here's my problem.....when they give me their footage, its already on DVD. When I install it, there's a "VTS" folder & inside that are the VTS_1_01....02 & so on VOB files. I convert them because the 1 game on the disc shows up as 3-4 VOB files. If you click on one, it plays, but not the whole game, just that segment. Now....when I convert just ONE of the VOB files.....I get the whole game in the new format. So I understand about the MPEG-2 being as good as it gets, but I don't have control over what others are using to film & then put on DVD. My camera shoots MPEG-2, AVCHD 1080 Full HD, but theirs are just your average JVC, SONY handycams. I just don't want to give them back a DVD with worse quality.

[aedipuss]

use a program like vob2mpeg to convert all the vobs on the dvd to 1 mpeg-2 file. then you can use vegas pro to cut/edit/assemble and it can smart render if the output mpeg-2 format matches the input so there will be no change in quality.

[gsperk]

Thanks "aedipuss". But let me ask you, cant I use the AVS Video Converter I have to convert to the MPEG-2? On there I have many choices.....
-DVD NTSC compatible - (MPEG-2, 4000 kbps, 720x576, 25 fps)

-Video: MPEG-2, 4000 kbps, Original size, 29.97 fps; Audio: 224 kbps

-HD Video 1080p - (MPEG-2, 15000 kbps, 1920x1080, 29.97 fps)

-HD Video 720p - (MPEG-2, 9000 kbps, 1280x720, 29.97 fps)

I just did a test and the MPEG videos looked better, more like the original except for the screen size. The files are 720x480, 9000, 29 fps. The original video on the disc filled up the screen, I assume because the DVD player upconverted. When I was doing my testing, I made my sizes all 720x480. That must be why the pic came out so small. What should I put the ratio on?

[poisondeathray]

When you use avs video converter, you are re-encoding = quality loss

When you re-wrap with vob2mpeg, as aedipuss suggested = no quality loss . Think of it as putting the original video in a different container

[manono]

I just did a test and the MPEG videos looked better, more like the original except for the screen size. The files are 720x480, 9000, 29 fps. The original video on the disc filled up the screen, I assume because the DVD player upconverted. When I was doing my testing, I made my sizes all 720x480. That must be why the pic came out so small. What should I put the ratio on?

You say you've been doing this for six years yet you still ask questions like that? Have you learned nothing in all that time?

Your hi-def stuff will have to be resized and reencoded for DVD. And probably encoded as 16:9. I suppose your already DVD stuff is 4:3, so you've got other problems also, if you're planning on mixing all the different sources together.

[gsperk]

Hey DipShit manono, you read this stuff all this time & you have not comprehended anything?? I said for the six yrs I did for myself & with only a crappy Roxio 8. You being such an Einstein I assume you know in the Roxio its pretty plain & simple. And when your video is from a $400 normal camera, there's not much to work with. Now with so many option (formats, codecs, ect...) AND its new to me....(guess you missed that part huh dumb ass), NO....I'm not sure what I should use & not use. Oh & I've always had my cheap cameras on widescreen, 16:9 setting...(You know they have that right?) ...& never had a problem before with pic size...just shot, edited & put on disc. And I don't have to reencode or resize my hi def stuff for DVD. Camera shoots in MPEG-2, AVCHD & my direct DVD excepted & burns MPEG-2, AVCHD formats.....perfect for the quick disc......but thanks anyway.

[Cornucopia]

Hmm, let's see. Whom would I listen to? Someone who's had 4 posts on these subjects? or someone who's had over 10,500? Gee, it's so hard - NOT!

Get your head out of your butt and get a clue. You've been doing this kind of stuff for a long time, but it's been very Paint-by-Numbers. You might not end up with a canvas of MUSH doing it that way, but you'll also never end up with a Rembrandt. Part of doing something like this is in beginning to understand the HOW and ultimately, the WHY. If you go for years and years, without even caring to get out of your comfort zone, you only have yourself to blame. I think that's what manono (who I know to be quite knowledgeable about video) was talking about.

So what do you do now?
Read the fundamentals - here, on Wikipedia, dv-info.net, doom9.org, etc. Then after understanding about video (resolution, color depth, bitrates, containers, codecs, frame types, etc), you approach your project with the idea in mind to MAINTAIN THE BEST QUALITY for your budget/limits, by doing the LEAST AMOUNT OF HARM to the image. That includes NOT converting more times than absolutely necessary, or doing 15 steps where 3 would work better (or vice-versa). This also means: Using the appropriate tool(s) for the job (not just an all-in-one).

Why do you think the Pros do it the way they do (and I would hope to consider myself in that august group)? Not just because they have money and want to spend it in this way, but because they want to excel and they've learned what is necessary to push themselves and their equipment to get such an excellent product. Besides, nowadays you can do wonderful things on a shoestring budget if you take pains and plan correctly and have the time to devote...

Award winning documentaries have been shot on simple StdDef DV-type equipment, so it' not always about the medium or equipment, but more in how you choose to use it.

BTW, in addition, Baldrick, aedipuss and pdr already gave you great info with which to start analyzing what you've done and what might be necessary to change. Do a re-read of their stuff (and do a little reading between the lines) and you'll be on the right track.

I think it's best that you start from square one. Throw away what you THINK you know about video. What you just said in that last post tells me that you know less than you think you do - you've just been somewhat lucky. That won't get you much farther, particularly with HD video formats becoming more complex in terms of options...

...oh, and the cussing & name-calling doesn't help your case at all. Manono may have been blunt, but he didn't actually insult you at all. He just asked a valid question...

Scott

edit: a little bit more humility wouldn't hurt either.

edit#2: sorry, one more thing - Anytime we read about someone asking what the "BEST" format is, without really qualifying their question as to required output/distribution formats, workflow, means, etc., it's always clear that that person is a newbie who doesn't really know yet what they're talking about and needs a little education in the fundaments...

[gsperk]

"I think it's best that you start from square one. Throw away what you THINK you know about video. What you just said in that last post tells me that you know less than you think you do - you've just been somewhat lucky. That won't get you much farther, particularly with HD video formats becoming more complex in terms of options...".......NOOOO KIDDING Cornucopia!!! Why in the world do you think I got on this thing??? And if somewhere you read in my posts where I thought i knew very much......then you must have encoded something hidden because I dont EVER remember thinking or saying that!! Lucky...maybe so, yet those days seemed very easy for all the more I do. This isnt a profession, its not gonna bring in the big bucks.....i do it because I enjoy filming and the kids love seeing themselves on TV with different edits and such. Its strictly a hobby! I am clueless on this new stuff, I am at square one & I am experimenting and looking for ideas, suggestions daily. Im very "picky" with all my sounds and videos. For years Ive had to look at "home video" quality & hated it. "COMFORT ZONE" you say,.....if you say so, but back then I called it priorities, meaning my boys (single parent) came first over my "wants" & "needs". So did what i could with what I had. Then and even now a 11,12 yr old doesnt care about his quality on the TV....he just wants to see himself. Me on the other hand am NOT satisfied with that when I know there is BETTER out there. So NOW......as you said "Besides, nowadays you can do wonderful things on a shoestring budget if you take pains and plan correctly and have the time to devote..." IS MY NOWADAYS!!! NOW is what I HAVE BEEN PLANNING FOR!!! NOW my "shoestring" and below budget... and the more "time" I have now that they are grown up,...has allowed me to invest in a $3000 camera instead of the $300 10-15 optical, 1.4 MP with 800X Digital Zoom handycam crap! NOW is my time.....so NOW.....I am standing right in the middle of that "SQUARE ONE" scratchin my head saying "damn I got a lot to learn". I look at this new software and all my ideas and editing techniques come to life, its amazing the things that can be done,...the things Ive wanted to do for years, BUT.....whats the BEST way to get it back to the people via DVD? Thats what im looking for! I see a ton of formats and files and options. For someone like me, I think, "hey, to have that many, they must all do something different". Why do I think that?? Yeah......good interpretation......IM A NEWBIE!!! Why you would think that I think Im something better.....again.....not sure what you read.....BUT YOU READ IT WRONG!!!! Ive been emailing techs from sony, bhphotovideo, and others with multiple questions about multiple things. My processes will always be the same. What I do will always be the same. So Im looking for formats, ways and a process that is the BEST..... just like i asked in my title! I will never be doing bigtime movies, documentaries and such.....no interest, just covering our local sports teams through out the year so others can enjoy their sons or daughters. Im not interested in what each format does, or learning every little thing about every little thing. Im after the BEST quality of video NO MATTER WHAT!! The little bit I think I know is what Ive been told mostly by emails from other techs and supports. Like the guy from Sony Webinar told me about DVDs use MPEGs. He said if Im making DVDs, then I need to render in MainConcept MPEG-2 and use Sony DVD Architect....so I have....it seems to work great. So Im assuming that if Im going to convert the VOB files....it may as well be MPEG. Am I right?.......I HAVE NOOOOO IDEA......again.....thats why Im here!!!!! Either way, somehow, someday, someway.....I'll learn and understand what I need to do. Like I said,..... I look daily. Some say one way....some say another. And YES....the guys earlier were very helpful....I NEVER said they werent.....I was explaining my testing and where I was at as far as experiments. The other guy just pissed me off because he acted like I should know. AGAIN.....why would he think I knew.....and WHY IN THE HECK would I be on here if I did.
I got on here for information to learn, to be educated.....not judged. If anything, you guys are the ones talking about your credentials and your experience. Me.....Im not interested in whose the best at what....... I just want ideas and suggestions. So take all that as you will.......Im still AT square one and still havent found my answers yet.

[_Al_]

You want to learn but you don't listen at the same time. They give you the answer for the best result, what you ask for.

Somebody mentioned Womble and vob2mpeg , did you check those ? Then you go on with Vegas, Or Womble would just simply suffice on its own, add some subtitles, export without rendering.

Instead you start to talk about some converter, that will degrade you video and you are just about to start editing, one conversion is perhaps waiting for you again.

[Cornucopia]

Ok, I'll bite.

First thing you need to do if you haven't done it already: get a good fluid-head tripod. Learn how to setup fast, calibrate fast, hook on the camera fast, lockdown/ease-up fast, pan smooth.

Then, now that you have a good camera (maybe a 6 on a scale of 1-10, IMO), you have to decide: what are you going to output - both as your "master" and as your distribution medium(s)?

(BTW, your cam is still "prosumer" at best. Notice the term "handy" in the title, which wouldn't show up on a real pro unit)

If you want to master in HD but distribute in SD DVD, your best bet is probably to edit in an intermediate format, and then when finished, make downrezzed copies for your SD masters (those will be MPEG2).

If you still intend to include excerpts from others' material, you have to either downrez your stuff first and have an SD master, or uprez their material and have an HD master. The only reason for doing the latter would probably be if you chose to output (now or in the near future) to BD rather than DVD (otherwise, you're making a 2-generation encoding round trip for nothing). If you choose to stay with an SD master, your output will still be much better looking having been downrezzed from HD than from having started with a consumer SD camera.

Your camera records in AVCHD, which is HIGHLY compressed. You DON'T want to edit directly that way. You can choose which intermediate format you'll use, based on features and compatibility with Vegas (Cineform and DNxHD both come to mind, but there are others).

Yes, you don't have to totally learn everything the pros do, but if you don't try (and let's hope in a humble, open and inquisitive way) you may not ever find out why certain ways of doing things are more or less beneficial to the quality of the outcome. And you SAID you wanted your quality to be BEST...

Choose your working file format(s) based on clean workflow. If Vegas works best with AVI, save your Masters as a type of AVI (Cineform & DNxHD codecs can be in AVI). MXF is another good editing container.

Note that your codec choices are naturally broken down into categories: those codecs which are meant for acquisition (recording/capturing), those meant for editing, those meant for storage (usually the same/similar to editing), and finally those meant for distribution. Your AVCHD is a very good distribution codec, a so-so acquisition codec, and a poor editing codec. MPEG2 (whether HD or SD) is not quite as efficient but more universal as a distribution codec, is not as efficient but less prone to dropouts (in the usual confiurations) than AVCHD as an acquistion codec, and is a slightly better (and more ubiquitous) editing codec, but still not prime. Cineform and/or DNxHD are unseen as distribution codecs, are rare and huge but helpful as acquisition codecs, and huge but smooth and powerful and common as editing codecs.
That's why you need to transcode at the appropriate time...

This is also where you start deciding what you're going to keep from your original captures and how you're going to backup/archive. Start asking yourself - is my stuff important enough to keep the originals after I've made a compiled master. Then, is my stuff and work important enough that I don't want to have to recreate an edited piece from scratch. Figure in the size of each of those projects and each of those project's segments and base your harddrive size requirements on at least double that requirement (I think triple is better...you never have enough...)
That's why you have to have reasons behind you choice of intermediate/editing codec- filesize is usually the limiting factor here.

Ok, that's a starter. More to come (from me and/or others) if it's clear there's a willingness to learn...

BTW, it would be a HELL of alot easier to read your posts if you ever decided to USE PARAGRAPHS. Might even make the difference between being answered and not.

Scott

[manono]

I said for the six yrs I did for myself & with only a crappy Roxio 8.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's the first I read of any mention of anything made by Roxio. And sometime during those six years you should of learned that nothing made by Roxio is worth even the time it takes to install it.

Your posts are way too long and no one wants to know your life story. Supply the information, answer the questions, and get to the point, instead of beating around the bush.

And I don't have to reencode or resize my hi def stuff for DVD.

Well, you do if you want it to play in a normal DVD player, which is the impression I got. Yes, you can keep your Hi-Def stuff Hi-Def, but there's no way it'll ever play in a DVD player, and unless you prepare it properly, it'll never even play in a Blu-Ray player. If computer or media player playback is OK with you, you might have said so already.