HD to DVD finial quality results?

[birdfeeder]

Hello, Newbie here. After reading page after page of info and then talking to experts the other day (They produce their own TV program) I'm more confused than ever.
I am about to start a new DVD project. I have one under my belt at this time that I completed a year ago and with the help of a young techie friend it worked out very well. I am filming 16:9 SD with a Canon Gl2. This new project has me wondering if I may be making a big mistake filming this new project in SD as opposed to HD. After reading posts here at VideoHelp I read that there is no value in filming in HD if your finial project will be a DVD. The experts that I talked to the other day said that if I film in HD I will end up with better colors, and quality overall when it is re-formatted to the DVD. I am skeptical of this and thought I would ask the real experts here at VideoHelp. I realize that the future is in HD but I do not want to go out and buy a new HD camera if it will not help the quality any more than my SD Canon when finished to DVD. I also realize that if I do buy the new camera, that I will have an HD version available if I need to up-grade sometime in the future but by the time everyone owns an HD TV and player in this country the contents of the DVD may be out of date anyway. It seems as though I am always being caught in the transition periods of technology. Thanks in advance

So my questions are---
#1 Do I gain any quality on a DVD by filming in HD?
#2 What is the estimated date that SD will be out of date?

[zoobie]

I'm sure it depends on the camera used but generally speaking, I find that shooting HD then downsizing gives me better quality because I'm starting with much more definition to begin with. You can downsize HD in the cam or with software. I always suggest HD because in a few months, you'll be kicking yourself for not having used it.

SD will be out of date 1/1/2005...ha ha

[birdfeeder]

Thanks for your insight Zoobie, thats what i'm being told more and more. This line of thought must go along with starting out with the best quality video to post on Youtube because when they get finished with it, it is still in better shape than it would have been if you posted it with a high compression in the first place. So I guess I will have to hold a bake-sale or two and get a new camera because I certainly don't want to produce something that, like you said, "I'll be kicking myself" over.

Yep--owned the top of the line Canon L 1 many years back, than the Gl2 and next--?????? is guess it really doesn't matter what I buy next because it will be out-dated when I get it. HAAhttps://forum.videohelp.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

[aedipuss]

1-what you get is a slightly better picture quality. the gl2 widescreen mode is still 720x480. the difference is the pixels are recording more horizontal area. in square pixel format they have to expand to 854x480 for viewing rather then the 720x480 the same pixels normally cover. hd 1080 or 720 doesn't have to change pixel shape(as long as it's not hdv).

2-not in this lifetime. dvd is in the bluray spec and most likely will be in any other format spec that is delivered on the same size disc in the future.

[birdfeeder]

Again thanks for the reply aedipuss, this is the type of answers I need. Since I am poor white trailer trash and have been purchasing pro-sumer cameras all of these years do you think the Canon XH-A1s 3CCD HDV Camcorder would be a good choice? It seems to fall in the price range to match the type cameras I have been purchasing.

[birdfeeder]

OOPS! Since i haven't received an answer I guess i shouldn't have asked about a specific brand. My bad ---FEEDER

[edDV]

OOPS! Since i haven't received an answer I guess i shouldn't have asked about a specific brand. My bad ---FEEDER

Why should we respond fast a suspect situation. Start again and explain the context.

You think we are Canon support?

[birdfeeder]

Don't get me wrong edDv, I was merely thinking that since I don't know all of the rules here yet (I will learn though) and I thought that it may not be permitted to ask the experts their opinion of the camera or any product. Thinking that this was not permitted because it would spark unwarranted debate. Kind of like what's the best computer apples or pc's? I know we don't want to go there. In one of the original replies from Zoobie he stated "Im sure it depends on the camera" so i was just wondering it the Canon XH-A1s 3CCD HDV Camcorder would be a good choice to produce a better quality DVD than the SD Gl2 that I presently have, that's all. thanks--FEEDER

[aedipuss]

OOPS! Since i haven't received an answer I guess i shouldn't have asked about a specific brand. My bad ---FEEDER

heh, not all of the posts here get replied to immediately. some take days as the people who answer them are a tiny minority and have other things that need doing, like work.

anyway to respond about the cams. the HDV xl1 cam has bigger sensors, and is more versatile, but may not improve the quality of an SD dvd by much over the gl2 which is a high quality cam to begin with. my choice, after working on several mixed HDV / SD projects using multiple cams including the gl2s would be to always start with HDV if possible. i shoot mostly HDV 30p whenever possible for use as both online video and dvds.

[edDV]

Don't get me wrong edDv, I was merely thinking that since I don't know all of the rules here yet (I will learn though) and I thought that it may not be permitted to ask the experts their opinion of the camera or any product. Thinking that this was not permitted because it would spark unwarranted debate. Kind of like what's the best computer apples or pc's? I know we don't want to go there. In one of the original replies from Zoobie he stated "Im sure it depends on the camera" so i was just wondering it the Canon XH-A1s 3CCD HDV Camcorder would be a good choice to produce a better quality DVD than the SD Gl2 that I presently have, that's all. thanks--FEEDER

The main reason to shoot HD is to have a 16:9 HD master for current or future use. Eventually everyone will have a high quality HDTV display and will in time notice the difference between SD and HD source.

For most viewers aspect ratio is the first thing they notice. Unfortuately the Canon GL2 (also the popular Sony VX/PD series) do not natively shoot 16:9 at full sensor resolution. Instead, they crop a 16:9 area out of the native 4:3 sensors. The result is lower vertical resolution when in wide mode. Newer camera designs have native 16:9 sensors and crop that for 4:3 so that vertical resolution remains constant in either mode. So, if you upgrade to a XH-A1, you gain quality from higher resolution sensors even if you shoot in SD DV mode.

If you shoot in HDV 1440x1080i mode, you will have a quality HD master but will need to downsize to 720x480 for DVD. The downsize can be done well or poorly depending on the software used. There are three basic methods.

1. Toss a field and downsize the remaining 1440x540 field to 720x480. This results in 720x480 30p. This frame rate isn't supported for DVD so 30p is then interlaced to 60i.

2. Deinterlace 1080 60i to 1080 60p and downsize the result to 720x480 60p. This is then interlaced into two 720x240 fields for 60i.

3. Separately downsize the two 1440x540 fields to 720x240 to make 720x480 60i

Method three gets the best DVD result but unfortunately most current edit software encodes using one of the other methods. Method one results in choppy motion. The quality of method two depends on the quality of the deinterlace. To get method three, you may need to use avisynth to downsize 1080i to 480i before encoding to MPeg2 for DVD.

[aedipuss]

or shoot 30p and not have to worry about downsizing to dvd rez, as deinterlacing first isn't required.

[birdfeeder]

Thanks for the info guys. The next project I am working on is a "how to" project. There will be a lot of close-up shots and a lot of hand motion. If I shoot in 30p will this affect the quality with all of that motion? I will be using Final Cut for an editing program. Having the HD master tape/s on hand in the end, would I transfer the footage by setting system preferences to accept the HD or would this be the place to accept it as SD? Or when i export it in compressor? I'm confused here as i have yet to use the HD format. I talked to a guy a couple of weeks ago and he told me that he converted it (HD) using mpeg-4, is this correct? Sorry for the silly questions.---FEEDER

[edDV]

Thanks for the info guys. The next project I am working on is a "how to" project. There will be a lot of close-up shots and a lot of hand motion. If I shoot in 30p will this affect the quality with all of that motion? I will be using Final Cut for an editing program. Having the HD master tape/s on hand in the end, would I transfer the footage by setting system preferences to accept the HD or would this be the place to accept it as SD? Or when i export it in compressor? I'm confused here as i have yet to use the HD format. I talked to a guy a couple of weeks ago and he told me that he converted it (HD) using mpeg-4, is this correct? Sorry for the silly questions.---FEEDER

30p will have half the motion samples. This is ok for internet but will be noticeably motion stepped on a large HDTV display.

With FCP, you would set an HDV project and import from the XH-A1 over Firewire. FCP will convert to AIC (Apple Intermediate Codec) in HD. After editing you will specify export in Compressor. For HDTV display you would export high bit rate interlace MPeg2 or h.264. For internet you would export lower bit rate progressive h.264*.

* matched to upload file size limits of the hosting service.

[birdfeeder]

Thanks edDV, Ok lets see if I got it straight, if my final project is specified as HD/AIC when imported form camera and I specify high bit rate mpeg2 or h.264 in compressor, is this the best quality to import to DVD-PRO for final burn? I will not be using it for the internet at all. Also if the frame rate 30p will show steeped for quick hand motion shots what other choices would I have to make this the smoothest finished product? --FEEDER

[edDV]

Thanks edDV, Ok lets see if I got it straight, if my final project is specified as HD/AIC when imported form camera and I specify high bit rate mpeg2 or h.264 in compressor, is this the best quality to import to DVD-PRO for final burn? I will not be using it for the internet at all. Also if the frame rate 30p will show steeped for quick hand motion shots what other choices would I have to make this the smoothest finished product? --FEEDER

DVD has only two supported formats. Either can be 4:3 or 16:9 aspect ratio

720x480i 29.97 fps - aka 60i -- best for motion
720x480p 23.976 fps - film rate

You can shoot 30F (interlace video with both fields sampled at the same point in time). This can be burned as interlace for DVD. I don't see an advantage for the type of video you describe.

For FCP,
HDV capture
AIC codec - This will be 8bit, interlace 1080, 4:2:0 similar to HDV format.

For Compressor
I'd export a 1080i HD file (MPeg2 at >= 30 Mb/s or H.264 at >=20 Mb/s) as a HD master

Then for 720x480i DVD MPeg2 bit rate comes down to program length. For one hour, encode CBR 9500 Kb/s video, 224 Kb/s audio. For longer program length use the bit rate calculator for average VBR bit rate.
https://www.videohelp.com/calc

[birdfeeder]

Ok Thanks for sharing your brain power edDV. I will get a new camera and get started practicing to find the best outcome. My guess is that it will take me a year to complete this project. I'm sure with my experience that i will be back loaded with more questions. Thank goodness there is a place like this for people like me, I love it, although most of it is over my head. I'm getting it slowly but surely. FEEDER

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

For what it's worth:

I bought a Canon XH-A1s just over 2 months ago after alot of research and find it to be an outstanding camcorder.

It's vibrant, sharp and am loving the 20X lens amongst other things.

The price is right compared to other options.

I too came from a Canon GL-1 then GL-2 background (still have a pair of those guys).

The A1S also shoots in SD or one can downconvert from HD to SD.

If you can work one into your budget, dependent on you needs: both present and future, at the present time it's a very solid choice IMHO.

Good luck!

[birdfeeder]

Thanks GL-2 Guy, I was just ending an hour and a half of on line research on the XH A1 and it looks to be the camera to get. Very few negative opinions on it. Even though it is a complete different camera than the gl2 I see a lot of the same controls. Thanks for your input

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

The A1s a huge step up from GL-2 SD-land and a real eye opener comparatively speaking (or at least for me) as I used those GL-'s for a good 5 years plus.

I never went back since I discovered HDV mid last year and only used the GL-2's if I had not other choice or in a low shooting environment.

Also borrow an A1 from my local cable station and its quite good but nearly as nice as a new A1s.

The A1s is an enhanced A1.

If you can afford either consider that the A1 has been discontinued for a couple of years and a used one thats worth having can be a tricky proposition.

Be careful & cautious if you go the used route!

[birdfeeder]

Yes, GL2 guy, I am seeing quite a few used ones available out there and I would be very skeptical of buying one. Who knows what evil lurks within them. I just can't understand why they buy the thing and it works so perfectly and yet have to sell it. Can't wait to get a new one now! -- FEEDER

[birdfeeder]

Hello folks, newbie here again. I realize this is an old post that I started awhile back but I would like to ask a question again. I have a new Canon XhA1s and have been using it when I get time and have posted a couple of youtube clips linked from a website that I have. They look great online but my main goal is to produce a full length dvd in the end.

The camera's default format films in 60i. I can change it to film in 30f or 24f. I have been told that if I want to film close-up on fairly quick hand movement that I should stay away from an interlaced format. If I film in the 30f mode the camera records in 60i to tape but the output is converted to a 30p at the terminal.

1. Is this the mode that I should be using (30f) or should I use the default 60i and de-interlace it with another program?
2. I use the AIC capture format in FCP 6 and It is my understanding that this will not change it from interlaced to progressive. I know that eddv suggested that I use avisynth here earlier in this post but I have no experience with using this tool at the moment.
3. How would I go about using this tool if 60I is the format to use? Do I need to capture to FCP using the AIC encode and then use the avisynth? I'm not sure of the workflow here. He mentions dropping fields and such but I have no idea how to do that (unless it is straight forward in the avisynth program).
4. Am I achieving the same thing by filming in 30P or am I messing up?
5. The subject that the DVD is be about will not become outdated for a long time and It would be nice someday to be able to re-make it into an HD version, say 10 years down the road.

Hope these questions don't drive people crazy if they seem so simple.--FEEDER

[poisondeathray]

The camera's default format films in 60i. I can change it to film in 30f or 24f. I have been told that if I want to film close-up on fairly quick hand movement that I should stay away from an interlaced format. If I film in the 30f mode the camera records in 60i to tape but the output is converted to a 30p at the terminal.

Pros and cons

If you want to capture the motions accurately you should use 60i . "30f" only captures half the motion samples. That's why things like sports programs, use it . One of the many problem withs interlace is deinterlacing artifacts. Each field only contains 1/2 the information of a full frame, so you can end of with jaggy aliasing artifacts when viewed. It also depends a lot on the end user equipment and the quality of processing

1. Is this the mode that I should be using (30f) or should I use the default 60i and de-interlace it with another program?

Lots of pros and cons. Largely depends on the type of piece you are shooting . If you were making a DVD you wouldn't deinterlace it , you would leave it 60i . If you wanted the 30p "look" then you would shoot 30p (it doesn't need to be deinterlaced, just interpreted correctly in your editor) . You NEVER deinterlace progressive footage, you just destroy the quality

2. I use the AIC capture format in FCP 6 and It is my understanding that this will not change it from interlaced to progressive. I know that eddv suggested that I use avisynth here earlier in this post but I have no experience with using this tool at the moment.

3. How would I go about using this tool if 60I is the format to use? Do I need to capture to FCP using the AIC encode and then use the avisynth? I'm not sure of the workflow here. He mentions dropping fields and such but I have no idea how to do that (unless it is straight forward in the avisynth program).

avisynth is a PC program (parts of it will run on linux, and there is avxsynth as well) . No Mac love.

First decide on the format you intend to shoot

4. Am I achieving the same thing by filming in 30P or am I messing up?

30f mode is same as 30p, just "stored" as 60i .

5. The subject that the DVD is be about will not become outdated for a long time and It would be nice someday to be able to re-make it into an HD version, say 10 years down the road.

Then you should plan your workflow accordingly. Do everything in HD as if you were making a blu-ray . Project and timeline settings in HD. Only the final steps should be conversion to SD formats such as DVD

[Cornucopia]

Regarding your original question about HD downsampled vs. SD:

Consider this - if you took a live feed from an (high quality) SD camcorder and a quasi-live feed (after high-quality downsampling processing to SD) from an high quality HD camcorder, where the only factor prior to downsampling was the resolution (and all other factors were similar, like D.R. Latitude, Low light sensitivity, lens optics, etc) you would find very little difference between the two. Especially if you were watching on an SD monitor.

When a difference IS noticeable, it lies in the fact that, in the case of SD cameras, you are usually encoding to DV compression, saving, and then performing edits, etc, and then usually re-encoding to DVD (aka MPEG2) and then usually playing back to an HD monitor (which involves upsampling). In the case of the HD camera, the downsampling usually occurs AFTER the ingest & edit but before the encode to MPEG2, so the encode is much more like a 1st generation live feed.

This basically follows the "oversampling theorem" I've mentioned here before, where true SMOOTHNESS in a media recording (audio or video) requires oversampling to be maintained as late in the game as possible (especially POST-PROCESSING). This would explain both why some "can't see a difference" and others can, depending upon when they were downsampled. In a sense, the 1st camera (SD) is "downsampling", using the optics & sensor, early in the chain, while the 2nd camera is downsampling (using software) late in the chain (more correctly, "downsampling" a little bit to HD early, then downsampling a little bit more/again to SD late). This early downsampling is going from the ~infinite resolution of reality to the resolution of the camera.

AFA what settings to shoot, edit, and encode:

I agree with edDV and pdr. If you can correctly downsample late in the game (using method #3 edDV suggested, AVISynth is good here), you would
1. Shoot HDV 16:9 (which is probably 1440x1080, 4:3 PAR, 16:9 DAR), 60i.
2. Ingest to FCP, transcoding to AIC-type.MOV (to make editing easier - no GOP stuff), either 1920x1080 or still 1440x1080 (whichever works best), 60i.
3. Edit and save an HD master (possibly still in AIC).
4. Downsample using abovementioned highquality method to SD (720x480, 16:9 DAR, 60i) using a lossless codec, then separately
5. Encode to MPEG2 for DVD.

This leaves any hardware settop box or TV to do the deint+resize to screen, maintaining the best quality.

Scott

[birdfeeder]

Thanks for the info pdr/cornucopia. I'm still confused on a lot of this stuff but I do understand the SD up conversion and the HD down conversion(early/Late). I will change my camera back to the 60i default and go with that. Although I do have some footage using the 30f format that I will have to try and mix in with the 60i (I guess I will cross that bridge when I get there)

I understand that 30p does not need to be deinterlaced and that was the very reason I thought that I should be using it.

I guess I don't understand the 60i portion. I thought that if I used the 60i format that in order for me not to have interlaced "jiggles", I would have to automatically use some software to deinterlace it.

I will go out and film something moving and go through the process of making a test DVD using Compressor and DVDpro and see how it comes out before committing to the finial dvd project.

I'm a lifelong cabinet maker and learning this video stuff is rough on a guy. I have a lot of admiration for you folks and what you know.

Don't be surprised to see me back here (hopefully not wasting your time) Thanks Feeder.

[poisondeathray]

I guess I don't understand the 60i portion. I thought that if I used the 60i format that in order for me not to have interlaced "jiggles", I would have to automatically use some software to deinterlace it.

What do you mean by interlace "jiggles"? Do you mean deinterlacing artifacts? Or combing (horizontal lines) when it's not deinterlaced?

You can think of interlace as a "cheap" way to get higher temporal resolution 59.94 samples /second. Instead of full frames, they are essentially half frames . At the time 59.94p wasn't standard (it's becoming more standard with AVCHD2.0 and new blu-ray/avchd 2.0 players and new camcorders)

59.94i is very standard. Standard distribution formats are set to handle it - DVD, blu-ray, HDTV. They bob deinterlace it for display (+/- other post processing), so 59.94p images on your progressive display . The only time you would deinterlace it yourself is for something like web delivery (e.g. youtube, vimeo, websites)

Your decision should be based more on the "look" you are going for. Do you want the live action , sports, aka "soap opera" look ? or more choppy , 24p filmic look ? Often it's dictated by the content of the production you are doing

Its all about pros & cons: Fast action and sports will look very bad if you used 29.97p because of the low temporal resolution (everything will look choppy and not smooth), but 59.94i can have deinterlacing artifacts and aliasing or jaggies, interline twitter, especially with objects that have straight lines - and the final quality can be impacted tremendously by the end consumer equipment (some expensive sets do very nice deinterlacing with extra processing, others are very simple and lower quality)

[birdfeeder]

That helps a lot PDR, Yes I meant "artifacts". Thanks guys for your explanation with the TV and hardware box (Bob deinterlace) as you and Cornucopia explained . That makes more sense. There is so much to grasp here and I have a small hand if you know what I mean. I'm going for it full bore now,60i it is. I'll yell if I get stuck again (most likely I will).--Feeder

if you ever have any questions about woodworking--feel free to ask.