Should we retired SVCD with DVDR ?

[SingSing]

SVCD give us 480x480 2520kpbs video.

DVDR give us 480x704 7000kpbs video.

There are enough different in sharpness and macroblock
in very fast moving action. Some shorter movie don't require
the hours of re-encoding and fit into one DVDR.
Cost of a DVD writer is only one time cost.

The different is cost 2 to 3 $0.25 CDR disc vs $1.50 DVD-R disc.

Is there reason to still working with SVCD ?

[csaag]

I would think DVD writers would have to come down a lot from the current $300-$400. The swiitch to compact discs from vinyl never would have happened so quickly if CD's were priced 7 or 8 times higher than vinyl records. I bought my CD writer for $20 after the rebate.
Also sometimes you waste a disc trying to get the proper filters or size problems or whatever other experimentation you happen to be doing.
It's a lot easier to waste a 0.25 CDR disc than a $1.50 DVD-R disc.
It will happen eventually though.

[EricB]

Everyone with a computer can play SVCDs so I still make a lot of them. Also, copying DVDs (home video) is still a long process.

[SingSing]

Making coaster is normally a starting issue.
After a few movie, that should never happened.

We always can use the R-W to check out before burn it to R.

I think DVD-writer will stay about $200 for a while,
until it was hit by next gen.

I remember CD writers were staying about $120 before DVD-writer show up.

[Big_glare]

Go CVD!!!

I switched to the CVD format which creates SVCD/DVD video files with the same video quality as SVCD and DVD. When playing back on TV I cant tell if Im watching something that was taped or the original DVD.

And CVD can go on DVD for me or CD for a friend. I stopped using SVCD altogether. Read about CVD in the SVCD description page.

[SingSing]

On animated movie like monster inc I can
see the different between 480x704 vs 480x480.
That's motivate me to move to DVDR.

I am suprised you can't see CVD's different,
unless you are watching all real actor's movie.

[Big_glare]

I dont typically watch cartoons so I cant say. The Animated stuff I do watch and record is the starship troopers series. I dont know about you but my back up of the Ice Planet series, which isnt on DVD yet looks damn good.

[SatStorm]

With a good source, always a full CCIR 601 gonna be better any 1/2 D1 frame size.
In other words, CVD and SVCD gonna look blury compared to a DVD

CVD is -for me- the best alternative to encode analogue grabbed stuff like VHS, SVHS and DVB transmissions, using todays hardware (including cables, S-Video connections, etc...).
Also, for VHS and SVHS sources, anything beyond CVD is technically an overkill. Those sources are about the 80% of our hobby. And we don't talk here about DVD ripping, this is another hobby... Related but other.

With Laser Discs as a source, and the use of S-Video good cables and hi tech/end hardware then the produced SVCD framesize gonna look better CVD's framesize. The same is also for analogue grabbs from a good Digital DVB transmission. The problems are two: With SVCD standard bitrates, it is impossible to support perfect picture at any condition. SVCD's bitrates are enough for the 85% of all situations, while with CVD the same bitrate goes well for about 95% of all situations. So, it is up to the user to choose: Sharpness or blockness? And if you use filters, the CVD can be equal in sharpnes of SVCD (of course with the same logic, using sharp filters with SVCD, you can archive even more sharpness, but this is another story). The second problem is the frame size. SVCD's one ain't supported as is on DVD discs (and blu Ray, which gonna be compatible to DVD specifications). So, you have one plus with SVCD but 2 minus compared to CVD. The choice always is the user's choice....

Have all in mind that both CVD and SVCD gonna look like crap on HDTV. I keep mention this all the time, because some people say that CVD looks bad compared to SVCD on their HDTVs. Well, both formats looks like crap on HDTV including DVD itself! So, this is not an issue I think. Crap is Crap. There is no more crap or less crap... If now you belong to the party of the less crap, then go less crap. Go SVCD... For 2 years more, SVCD gonna be an alternative. After that, you gonna have DVD burners and you gonna burn to DVD-Rs for about 1 and a half hours per disc, because you gonna like the picture. Some others, gonna use 1/2 D1 framesizes, same as CVDs that is, and with an average of 3000kb/s gonna have 2-3 or more hours per disc that way. It is gonna be like SP and LP on VCRs today. There are those fidelity lovers and those "let's do the job" lovers...
That is the true plus of the CVD: the frame size. It is a DVD legal picture framesize. So, even virtual, CVDs gonna exist for many more years. Who can say that for SVCD?

About cartoons: For a movie like Monsters Inc, CVD and even SVCD look blurry compared the superbit DVD.
But for the Looney Toons Marathon I grabbed from Boomerang that sunday, the CVDs I made look amazing. Exactly like the broadcast. So, again, we going to same point: Anything has to do with the source. Sometimes (most of them) full CCIR is an overkill and sometimes (much less untill today) it is a must.
And to tell you the true, only distributers have problems with the CVD/SVCD quality... For most home users, a "SVHS quality" is enough. So, CVD (and SVCD) is the ideal solution

[Big_glare]

I dont know about anyone else but If I have an HDTV set, the last thing Im going to play on it is anything CD based.

If you can afford an HDTV go buy the legit DVDs. and a DVD recorder for TV shows.

[energy80s]

There's no such thing as HDTV in the UK. Any chance of that died in 1990 when BSB went bust with their D-MAC transmission format. I work for the BBC and we have absolutely no intentions of upping picture quality beyond the existing PAL 625 standard. If you look at the way Digital Satellite TV is going, you are actually getting a much poorer and lower resolution picture than you did with analogue signals! THIS IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE.

Therefore if we know that there will be no high definition television sets in the forseeable future you author your discs for the existing standards. In this case CVD resolution of 352x576 is ideal for all 4:3 sets. However if you are trying to author in 16:9 anamorphic then go for full D1 res of 720x576 as the "sideways stretching" of the CVD image looks poor compared with full D1 sources.

[crahak]

Well, for stuff recorded from my DVB, i stick to CVD. Looks just as good as the original show, as DSS/DVB aren't really that great. Anything more would be overkill, even if you have a HDTV (heck, DSS/DVB would look like crap on it too then). If you're ripping DVD's then it's a different thing. You'd want a non-reencoded DVD, but with my 27" 4:3 TV, I stick to DivX. Oh well. Different sources, different TVs, different format and quality lovers. We just can't all agree on the same thing.

[SingSing]

Can most of the DVD-rip fit into a DVD-R without re-encoding ?

The movement is from CDR/W to DVDR/W. Therefore
is more important to find out can we jump to 5000 kpbs,
instead of working between various S/X/C/CVD format.

The move is like from VCD to SVCD.
The bit rate make all the different. In that move,
The extra hours to encoding to SVCD was acceptable.
It was a mass movement based on pratocal reasons.

[Timoleon]

SatStorm ---

Why will DVD itself look like crap on HDTV? I'm lusting after a 43" model, but if DVD movies look like shit on it...

I just don't understand --- please explain!

[SatStorm]

DVD today is limited @ Pal and NTSC specifications.

HDTV is beyond those standards.

So, a DVD to HDTV shows like a pro VHS on a Plasma screen in a way.

Why you think superbit DVDs appear? Because the first owners of hi end screens start noticing the "tragic" truth... So, superbit DVDs is something to make them less cry for their money (they bought something which digital technology ain't ready yet to support)

[beagle]

I own 3 stand alone DVD players and none of them will play a SVCD, they will all 3 play DVD-R, DVD+R, and VCD. I personally started burning all the "good" movies that I run across using the DVD-R, +R format and use the VCD format for the "okay" movies. Sure I have burned a few DVD-R, +R coasters but not that many. I have never gotten the CVD format to work on one of my stand alone DVD players.

[SingSing]

DVD is 480P, and HDTV is 1080i.
You need at least a 50" to get the theater feel. Size does matter.
You ready need to go look at the model of projection TV,
before you buy one.

Analog projection TV, has tiny black horizontal lines.
HDTV has a waterly big overscan lines that look like plastic.
Toshiba nd Panasonic and .. are trying various scheme of re-conversion.
I don't know how succesful they are.

The best monitor is your computer screen.

[sikafleks]

Yes, it is true that HDTV's resolution is greater than DVD's, but this of course does not automatically mean that your DVD's will look crappy on your new HDTV. The important things are a) progressive player b) good scaler. Anything with Faroudja's new Sage chip inside will rock your socks off or if you wan't to have a pixel perfect image with low costs, go for HTPC with new Radeon 9000.

And the for the superbit.. It just uses a higher bitrate, thats all. No added resolution, no added nothing. Only more bits per second. And IMO, kinda useless (yes, I own few superbit releases, I was curious).

[energy80s]

Indeed, the ONLY way to get superior pictures from DVD's is to change the resolution. Upping the bitrate will have no effect. If you are stuck with 720x576 (or worse still the 480 res of NTSC) then don't be surprised if it looks worse on an HDTV than on a standard res TV.

The idea behind SuperBit DVD's was to correct the artifacting that is present on some existing DVD's with lots of extras crammed onto the one disc! Why do you think that new releases are using 3 and 4 discs instead of the usual 2. My LOTR collectors set is 4 discs, and the ET collectors set (due on the 9-12-02) is a 3 disc set. This way, the viewer gets the benefits of high quality pictures without the studio having to pay to re-encode the film and bring out two different versions.

[SatStorm]

Superbit has more bitrate, so less artifacts.
Those artifacts are only noticable to HDTVs. On a standard screen, you see no difference!

About progressive player and the use of scalers: Using technics to boost the quality, can't hold the fact that the source ain't good. Also, for PAL, progressive scan is a new story for expensive DVD standalones, well known for non flexibility...

[hp_lovecraft]

Everything I have read at www.hometheaterforum.com says that DVD looks BETTER on HDTV, not worse, because of oversampling and aliasing.
Why would artifacts be more obvious on HDTV? That doesnt make any sense.
Here is the reason why DVD looks BETTER on HDTV (from www.videophile.info):

Upscaling 720x480 to a higher resolution is not about creating 'detail' that isn't there in the first place. Its about presenting those 720x480 pixels on a display device with the least possible amount of high frequency aliasing noise.

Huh? Ok, only because you have 720x480 SAMPLES of an analog medium (like film in this case), doesn't mean that displaying them AS SQUARE PIXELS WITH SHARP BOUNDARIES on a display device is the right form of output to reapproximate the smooth analog waveforms it originally captured! By upscaling digital samples to a higher resolution, you interpolate a smooth waveform between the discrete samples. The more interpolation steps the better.

So, YES, DVD will look even better on HDTV.

Beagle:
Have you tried SVCD with a VCD header? Or you could try cDVD with CVD resolution and bitrate.

To the original question:
Most studios are using dual-layer DVDs. Some say because you can't rip them to DVD-r without reencoding (but the studios say for higher quality). Whichever.

nick

[SingSing]

Two layer disc are essentially hybrid of two disc,
rip and burn to two DVD-R is a reasonable answer.

[SatStorm]

My friend hp_lovecraft,
The synonime of the word "Horror" in the HDTV world is called: Interlace.

Also you ask: "Why would artifacts be more obvious on HDTV? That doesnt make any sense"
I shall answer you with a question: Why VHS looks like crap on a big screen TV? (>36'')

[afwasborstel]

I always use 704 x480 or 704 x 576 with my SVCD

[SingSing]

If the reason is vertical and horizonatl resolutions,

Then large screen Tv make DVD look like VHS of yesteryear,
adequate but not satisfied.

What is the resolution/bitrate spec for the next generation DVD player ?
I means those blue-ray/blue laser stuff.

What is the bext DVD disc yet ? ( Battle of the Clone ? )

[energy80s]

Everything I have read at www.hometheaterforum.com says that DVD looks BETTER on HDTV, not worse, because of oversampling and aliasing.
Why would artifacts be more obvious on HDTV? That doesnt make any sense.
Here is the reason why DVD looks BETTER on HDTV (from www.videophile.info):

Upscaling 720x480 to a higher resolution is not about creating 'detail' that isn't there in the first place. Its about presenting those 720x480 pixels on a display device with the least possible amount of high frequency aliasing noise.

Huh? Ok, only because you have 720x480 SAMPLES of an analog medium (like film in this case), doesn't mean that displaying them AS SQUARE PIXELS WITH SHARP BOUNDARIES on a display device is the right form of output to reapproximate the smooth analog waveforms it originally captured! By upscaling digital samples to a higher resolution, you interpolate a smooth waveform between the discrete samples. The more interpolation steps the better.

So, YES, DVD will look even better on HDTV.
nick

Following that logic, VCD would look better than SVCD!

All upsampling is doing is "blurring" the existing image more by stretching it out to cover a larger area than before. This looks worse than just showing the raw picture to begin with.

[arealgijoe]

With DVD-R prices down to a buck, it ahs become practical are cost effective to jsust burn to DVD-R. I ahve a VCDR and DVD recorder (E-30). I have had good results with both VCD and VD formats. But there is no way to put most movies on a single CD-R disk. That alone, quality issues aside, is enough reason for me to make DVD versions over VCD versions. As a bonus I get better quality, but jsut the better quality alone can be worth it.

I still have and will continue to use my Terapin VCDR for some uses. Say I want to send others copies of video clips I make or other short videos, a CD-R is more paratical, cheaper and less trouble.

Both VCD and DVD formats ahve their advantages and also disadvantages. DVDs I think are more compatable, wspecially compared to SVCD. Only my one Pioneer wil play a SVCD disk.

So for $1 v.25cents I get better quality and a whole movie, even 2 movies if I want on ONE DVD disk. so far I only use the 2 or 4 hr. modes, heck at 6 hr rate, you can burn video on DVD-R media cheaper than CD-r.

JD and 2bits worth

[SingSing]

Is SVCD only make sense to people who own Apex or Pioneer players ?

How many other players can play SVCD without problem ? I assume
there is a lot of Sony, Toshiba, sharp and panasonic out there that
can't play SVCD but able to play DVD-R.

[SatStorm]

SVCD and CVD make sense in all the planet except USA...
In europe for example, all new DVD standalone models after summer 2000 supports SVCD (and CVD unofficially).
Think global a bit.... The word ain't only US!
Even new Sony players play CDR and SVCD/CVD without picture issues! (they do have a audio problem most of the times)

DVD-/+R is more compatible ofcourse CD based solutions. These are DVD standalones, remember?

[SingSing]

It was not our ( the consumer ) doing.
Sony and Panasonic decided that they not going to support
CDR/W and SVCD in their DVD players early on in US.
After long lines of return, then they decided to half heartly
support CDR/W and S/X/VCD.

But there are a lot of players sold to US consumers,
and created the feeling SVCD is an odd ball/off track things.

It is not easy/pratical for us to send Home Video SVCD to family and friend.

[thxkid]

I find that the more cheaper korean or asian brand of DVD players play the SVCD format, its the Japan made DVD players that have more of the problem, but I see in the near future that SVCD will be Like what VHS is compared to DVD Player, you will use it sometimes but will use the higher end format most of the time, I use DVD-R for all except for poor or sub SVHS quality I use XVCD or SVCD. I bought 2 DVD Home recorders and will never use a Crap VHS machine again and I limit the use of VCD and SVCD to friends and realitives who's machine will not play DVD-R's, Once the DVD Burners hit the sub $200(watch after christmas) I plan to switch over to that for 75% of all burning. At this point though I can get just as good as Recorded Copy on DVD-R compared to a DVD Burned copy and in a lot less time also. So once I do get a Burner I won't go completely over to it, just the burns I need with Dolby Digital intacted.