VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or Try ConvertXtoDVD and convert all your movies to DVD. Free trial ! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3
FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 61 to 77 of 77
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    central NJ
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by PhilipL
    For those who do not have 20 years worth of broadcasting experience and so are completely unaware of what to look for or what to critique, will find little difference between the quality they perceive between any DVD Recorder currently available, which is the point you have missed from my post.
    That is a good point. I was just talking about that to a co-worker.

    *BUT*, Zoran did see a difference. It would be wrong of him not report it as he saw it.

    His rating is no different than any of the ratings you find in PC Magazine, Car & Driver, etc. Ratings are in general done by people who work with the equipment day in and day out. They will see the difference.

    Just because the average person won't see the difference doesn't mean the tester shouldn't report it.

    I am glad for Zoran's post, because I have neither the money nor resources to buy 4 DVD recorders and compare them side by side.
    Quote Quote  
  2. This topic can go on and on as it is 1-objective as well as being 2-subjective.
    To use sound as an example of objectivity and subjectivity is not the best.
    Sound (audo)is VERY subjective while video is generally more objective...certainly to the average person who has good vision.
    My background is 'imaging arts'
    Zoran I believe makes the assumption that most people who would see his side by side comparison ( even with a resolution test) would probably say that the Sony has the sharpest picture (laypersons term..it looks clearer) as one would say of a photograph. Also recognizable by the average person would be skin tone ....looks more pleasing but not necessarily more realistic. Kodachrome film and its pleasing skin tone confirms that.
    Yet if one were to see a Sony example one day and a Pioneer the next day I wonder if that difference would stand out.
    Most of us here need as much help as we can get. We all want a great picture...highest resolution....good skin tone and all the features and benefits that work with our present wants and needs as well as some future ones.
    I for one could never see that many recorders let alone do any real testing.
    As an example I record a lot of tapes from satellite using a Sony N50 VHS
    that Consumers has rated as one of the best re quality and also a good buy. I am impressed with the quality of these recordings. Better than prerecorded tapes. According to Consumers ...as good as the SVHS models and less recording hiss.
    I have to rely on sources such as Consumers and others.
    Zoran has done a lot of that for us. His background serves us well....not to mention his generosity in sharing.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Originally Posted by Yvon
    Originally Posted by webeye
    Some info from Panasonic Canada.....sit down for the List Prices

    http://www.panasonic.ca/english/audiovideo/dvd/index.asp

    I did see a full page ad in the new Can mag. 'Toro' for the Panny 100

    Are you sitting? $2400 CDN...List + 15% tax.

    That list price is exagerated. I don't think that anybody sells at this price.

    Yvon
    Perhaps these are but Sony often sells at list or very close...I see
    little discounting on their recorder.
    I have yet to see besides the Panny 50 any of the other models in Canada. Many are new and are just surfacing.
    I believe Future Shop sells the Sony for $1200 or $1300
    Quote Quote  
  4. Originally Posted by PhilipL
    What difference does that make? Remember its VBR recording, that can never be accurate to the minute as, umm, the bit rate varies depending on the footage.
    I always thought it made a big difference. I guess not. Thanks for clear explanation.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Withdrawn
    Quote Quote  
  6. Withdrawn
    Quote Quote  
  7. Philip...????
    What we see is very subjective, take a piece of art, you can not measure in a lab how people will feel when looking at it. [quote Philip]

    Correct....you cannot 'scientifically' measure what one feels about art....but you can measure levels of sound and sharpness (resolution).

    How one vs another or interprets the results is subjective. Some people have little interest in sound quality or sharpness (resolution) but they know the relative difference when something is sharp (clear) or not.

    Assuming one acccepts Zorans test results ...based on side by side test results and his expertise.....and that some of use are interested in getting the best that we can afford....I tend to accept what he shares with us.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member Capt_Diode's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Niceville Florida
    Search Comp PM
    Hey Zoran,

    Just for curiosity, did you happen to use any test Patterns or generate any stair case rasters on these units? Obviously it would not test artifacts caused by motion but could be used as a frame of refference. FWIW I trust your observations as sound and unbiased. I used to test my VCR's years ago but due to carrer changes, I no longer have access to this kind of gear. I sure miss the circle with the Indian!

    Cheers,
    Captain Diode
    Beep beep, oh no heavy, the coins keep coming out, beep beep, even the telephone hates me, beep beep, I wish there were no machines, and everyone led a pastoral existence, trees and flowers don't deliberately cool you out and go beep in your ear. - Neil
    Quote Quote  
  9. Originally Posted by PhilipL
    Hi

    One of the ways MPEG encoding works is on the basis that our eyes and brains cannot resolve detail in movement. If you pause DVD (especially home brew ones) on a large movement, say a pan, you will often seen bad artefacts in that freezed frame, however when it is watch at normal speed it looks good. Of course people will see this differently depending on how their brain and eyes can follow movement.

    To say what people see is more objective is not correct. Look at all the optical illusions that trick the brain, magic tricks with slight of hand, even "magic eye" 3D pictures that some see and some never do.

    What we see is very subjective, take a piece of art, you can not measure in a lab how people will feel when looking at it.

    Regards

    Philip

    I cannot have any reasonable discussions with somebody who tirelessly insists in every post that technology is nothing but immeasurable magical trickery.

    Zoran
    Quote Quote  
  10. Withdrawn
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    WEBEYE WROTE

    Perhaps these are but Sony often sells at list or very close...I see
    little discounting on their recorder.
    I have yet to see besides the Panny 50 any of the other models in Canada. Many are new and are just surfacing.
    I believe Future Shop sells the Sony for $1200 or $1300[/quote]

    ================================================

    Well, the Sony deck is overpriced by about $500.00
    Can you imagine how much they will ask for the new model to come, with the very large HD?

    Once, I bought in the US a Hi8 deck with a Omega wrap ( which was a very
    badly designed mechanics for this kind of tape) more than $3,000.00 US plus transport, taxes, etc. That deck has always damaged the tapes.

    I think that was the last time Sony used that wrap. Subsequently, they used the M wrap.

    Back to DVD recorders, I have seen on the net that Sony has more decks to come, some of them surely much more expensive than the GX-7, but others like the GX-3 and GX-5 might be more affordable, albeit with less options. No info about these decks.

    Was it not for Panasonic's DVD Ram that I could not use without an expensive external Firewire (I use a iMac G3 400 MHz) DVD Ram reader drive, I would surely follow Zoran's example and buy the Panasonic E-60.

    I have a great esteem for Zoran who taught us so much.
    As for you, thanks again for having helped me before.

    Yvon [/u]
    Quote Quote  
  12. I was born in la Belle Province... 8) but please don't hold that against me.
    Quote Quote  
  13. I have a friend who hates listening to CD, and is still holding on to Vinyl records, obviously through a pretty good system, and insists the sound is more involving and real. [........]

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    He insists the sound is more involving and real....(this guy probably says the same for wine..ie from France ) :P
    Yes there are a number of so called 'purists' that say that....but than again
    perhaps it just nostalgia.....those who miss the vinyl 'noise'.

    It would be fun to put these guys thru a test.

    Lets agree to put a stop to this discussion? 8)
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Australia
    Search PM
    Actually Philipl, having worked at Sony in Broadcast engineering I would like to make the following comment about your friend who "clutches" his old records. If you were to make a recording on CD from the output of the record player, do you think your friend could tell the difference??

    We actually did that test on a room full of audiophiles. First we covered up the play back units so they could not see them, we played them the CD version, then the vinyl. 9/10 picked the the difference. Then we repeated the exercise, this time we used a CD that was recorded from vinyl. The result was totally random....they could not tell. Reproduction is what is important. And man I hate macroblocks…..but my mrs would never see them…or care.

    I do have some questions regarding the quality of MPEG encode of these recorders.

    1. How do any of them fair with old degraded material. My experience is with offline encoding, even at max bitrates (7M VBR max of 9) I can see artifacts....I can virtually eliminate these problems by using temporal smoothers and the like....but my main concern with the purchase of one of these recorders is the quality. I think I have tried nearly every offline encoder there is...most are very disappointing. I just can't see how a real time encoder could compete even in the highest quality modes.
    Obviously my main attraction is the time saver in real time encoding since the above involves a lot of dicking around, and can tie up a computer for 10 hours for 1 hour of video (when u have to use all these filters)....

    Mind u even with offline encoding with DV material I can still see artifacts, and yeah I have tried cinemcraft, procoder, tmpge (Procoder wins for DV and old captures home video, cinemcraft for DVD sources)….I still find its best to run the material through some light filtering to improve the compressibility….then I can see them off cable tv…if I wore glasses I would think I had blocks in the friggin lens…everywhere I look I see blocks..aarrrrggggggg!!!! But then that’s what working in the industry does to u…I am verrry fussy

    2. Obviously its very attractive to be able to fire DV straight out of a proggy like Adobe premier once your finished editing to a DVD recorder. But if you want to customize the DVD menus and stuff, is it possible to fire the MPEG 2 file/VOB back down to your PC so you can author the DVD more professionally? I guess u could always record it on a RW and then get the VOB off that way...sigh....?? hick the encoder that adobe premier includes is a piece of %^$#....even poking it into procoder as a plug in directly sucks…I find u really have to run it through filtering…..

    I am just wondering if these machines are expensive toys or not…can they compete with offline encoding?? ….I would really like to play with one and see how good they really are first hand before I buy one. I do not have the 20K to buy a real MPEG encoder. I am just looking for a relatively cheap fast good MPEG encoder that can double as a cool VCR when I am done raping it. But ARE they any good really?
    Quote Quote  
  15. Hi nsdn!

    You are right - the real time encoder cannot compete with offline encoder.
    But then... they are not design to do that. Personally, I can live with XP (1 hour) recording mode. It is not perfect... but it is OK for me.
    The SP (2hour) mode is completely different story. You can definitively see artifacts and blocks. But then, again... I found that other people do not complain about them. Maybe because they can not see them, or maybe they do not know for anything better... I bought my DVD recorder to serve those customers.


    Zoran
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    central NJ
    Search Comp PM
    How many hours at XP mode can one record on the 80GB hard drive?

    Thanks.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads