I use a software TMPG encoder and edit my AVI DV on Premiere and then I encode it to MPEG2. What is the standard for converting? Before or after editing? Advantages?
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 16 of 16
-
-
After. Mpeg is more difficult to edit. It's intended to be final output.
There's no place like 127.0.0.1
The Rogue Pixel: Pixels are like elephants. Every once in a while one of them will go nuts. -
Always, always *after* editing.
While it is theoretically *possible* to edit MPEG, it's never a good idea. Difficulties with frame accuracy, recompressing already compressed video and other problems make it a very difficult proposition. If you have a choice, do it the right way."Like a knife, he cuts through life, like every day's his last" -- Mr. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang -
When possible, you always want to edit a video before encoding to mpeg. mpegs are a very poor format to edit with since they are highly compressed. DV format is very easy to edit since there is no compression between frames (it only has I frames).
"A beginning is the time for taking the most delicate care that the balances are correct."
- Frank Herbert, Dune -
What mkelly said, but If you have an mpeg2 source that you need to edit and you do not have the source avi, dv, or mpeg1, you can edit with Ulead Video Studio 6, or 7. It works very good and I have never had any audio/video sync issues. Again, only use this option as a last resort.
-
What about an MPEG capture that was done as I frame only from an ATI MMC application? Using the 15Mbs I frame only capture option, seems like editing shouldn't be a problem, and then re-encode to DVD compliant stream with your favorite encoder? Since each frame is standalone, I don't see a problem with editing it, yes?
n6nfg -
Depends. If you edit a JPG image, each and every time you save it, even at the maximium compression, you lose quality.
Editing MPEG video would, I suspect, behave much the same way. Maybe not cuts only (but maybe) but at the very least you couldn't apply effects or transitions without losing quality.
And there are sync issues -- lots of people have reported on the DVDLab forum that even just trimming MPEGs have caused audio to go out of sync for them.
As I said earlier, it's not something you want to do if you can avoid it -- if you can't avoid it, then obviously you must do what you must do."Like a knife, he cuts through life, like every day's his last" -- Mr. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang -
AVI is an editing-only format.
MPEG is a final output format.
FYI: Removing footage or commercials is splicing, not editing, and can be done in either AVI or MPEG with no loss of quality.Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
FAQs: Best Blank Discs • Best TBCs • Best VCRs for capture • Restore VHS -
Um, not sure I agree with you.
If you're right, then the years I spent as a film editor (and the appropriate title) were really only years as a film splicer. Not to mention that some of the best films in the world were edited together by "simply" cutting footage out and putting new stuff in.
I understand your basic intent, but the definition is too facile and not at all accurate. However, I would not argue with you if you want to say "if you are going to do any editing other than cutting commercials out and/or splicing things together, do it in AVI. Otherwise, you may be able to get away with doing it as an MPEG.""Like a knife, he cuts through life, like every day's his last" -- Mr. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang -
There are a number of systems that use I-FrameOnly MPEG to capture and edit with. Having them be I-Frame allows for editing at any point. Given a high-enough bitrate, this kind of MPEG will operate just like any other compressed codec-MJPEG, DV, Wavelet, etc. Yes, it will degrade with consecutive iterations, but so do any of those other codecs (unless they're lossless, of course), but most of the above-mentioned codecs will work well if kept to within a few generations. The greatest loss is usually the 1st, subsequent generations-in a sense-already have video that is pre-disposed to good compression.
Now, if you don't give 'em plenty of bitrate, then you'll quickly notice the degradation.
If you're talking about std. IBP coded MPEG, the whole point is moot. AVOID editing that!
Scott -
I have been captureing through firewire DV to DVD-MPEG2 compliant, Editing and smart render to the same DVD-MPEG2 settings as the capture with Ulead MediaStudio Pro7.
Does this mean that if captured raw DV then edited it, then rendered to the DVD-MPEG2 format that my quality would be better?
My current process hasn't shown any issue but Im willing to change if I have enough HD space and there is a improvement. -
Yes, MachineMan,
It probably would be better. How much and whether it's worth it to you is a matter of your opinion.
Scott -
Originally Posted by mkelley
When you are ACTUALLY working with the video, cutting and joining are just splicing. Nothing more. Editing in the digital world involves overlays, fades, etc... anything more than the digital equivalent of scissors and glue.
Don't get me wrong. Old fashoined splicing wasn't all that easy. Digital splicing is. A monkey should be able to do it. These days, splicing is not editing.
Making films that only require splicing does not make them any less in quality. That's how things were done back then. Nothing wrong with it. Editing on tape was difficult too, but again, just selecting and re-recording footage in the proper order is a far cry from editing in the transitions, overlays, mixing, etc.
It just depends on what needed to be done. Splicing in digital has far fewer requirements than it did in analog.
And your age is showing.Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
FAQs: Best Blank Discs • Best TBCs • Best VCRs for capture • Restore VHS -
While I still don't agree with you that "simply splicing" digital tracks is not editing, we may be splitting nits. A monkey could do it only if that monkey knew what scenes should go where -- even a monkey (or an automated process) couldn't intelligently cut out commercials, for example.
Age -- well, yes, I am indeed older than I feel (on most days -- some days I feel 1000 :>). I don't know what the industry is like nowadays, but when I edited we basically put the story together. My experience is that a good editor can usually improve a movie at least as much as a good director. Indeed, it's pretty well known that "Jaws" (the movie) was "saved" by the late Verna Fields (the editor) after Spielberg did such a lousy job filming it (to his credit he did shoot enough extra footage she was able to accomplish this, but it was more a fluke than by design). Steven was young and still fairly inexperienced, so that was to be expected: he learned fast.
Nowadays I think most directors also edit their films, so a film editor's job may indeed be more "splicer" than actual editor (which has the direct analogy to the editor of a book or paper, who actually decides what should be left in and what should be removed, or edited out). It's too bad if this is the case, because even the best writers in the world need good editors to make what they create even better.
I miss the smell of acetone... <g>"Like a knife, he cuts through life, like every day's his last" -- Mr. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang -
Here's a good example.
When I capture, say a TV ep, and I want to cut out the commercials, I use VDUB. It's quick, fast, and does a good job ( capped in AVI with Hffyuv/Mjpeg ). I don't lose any quality, since I'm not re-compressing anything.
When I want to do a 'Gee-Whiz Slicker than Snot' video, I use Premiere 6.5 . It's much better at transisitions (that have to be rendered, and then encoded to final output), special effects, and all the hoopla with true editing. It also takes me a good amount of time to lay down my seperate videoa nd audio tracks. However, the final product is superior to anything VDUB could do. Now you might get something similiar with avisynth, but I can't concieve of editing a 10 minute video on the command line.
I could use Premiere to edit out the commercials, and it would do a good job, even encode to SVCD fro me, but it's a lot of extra work and more tool than I need.To Be, Or, Not To Be, That, Is The Gazorgan Plan -
Originally Posted by mkelley
I don't know what goes on in the video industry either, but what few people I know and from what I've read, directors do have a large part of editing, and splicing is a thing of the past. They add so many graphics that the entire film is assembled digitally and heavily edited. Often, even shot on digital cameras! Even some of the simplest movies have digital hoopla added just because they can.Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
FAQs: Best Blank Discs • Best TBCs • Best VCRs for capture • Restore VHS
Similar Threads
-
How to import MPEG2-TS to Adobe Premier? How to convert MPEG2-TS to MKV? :)
By farzad in forum EditingReplies: 19Last Post: 29th Feb 2012, 16:25 -
mpeg2 ts file convert to mkv or mpeg2 ts......change only video bitrate...
By jrblack in forum Video ConversionReplies: 4Last Post: 24th Jan 2011, 18:45 -
Help :Editing mpeg2
By striker9 in forum Video ConversionReplies: 4Last Post: 7th Nov 2010, 10:05 -
Editing a Mpeg2-PS file
By too2buff in forum EditingReplies: 5Last Post: 26th May 2009, 10:12 -
Editing mpeg2
By jkipp in forum Newbie / General discussionsReplies: 5Last Post: 7th Sep 2007, 12:38