DV Workflow??

[anonymous_whatever]

Hi,

I want to encode videos using DV to xVid. Working with DV is not an option. Don't suggest buying a large hard drive, getting a new computer or anything that suggests I should work with DV.

Would this be a good workflow? ::

1.capture DV

2. convert to intermediate codec, h.264 intraframe compression only

3. work/store h.264 data, delete DV data, finally export to xVid

would this workflow end up having roughly the same quality as DV directly to xVid?
does this intermediate codec contribute to a huge degradation in quality?
is this a reasonable, common practice way to do this?
is AVC-Intra 100 better to use?

Any and all answers welcome, just don't suggest I work with and store DV! Thank you.

[manono]

Don't waste time, just convert straight to XviD, if that's what you want.

[hech54]

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/343452-DV-Question!!!!!?p=2140251&viewfull=1#post2140251

[anonymous_whatever]

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/343452-DV-Question!!!!!?p=2140251&viewfull=1#post2140251

Yes, a similar question. But not the same. I've found out x.264 is the best bet for intraframe only compression.

[hech54]

I'm still trying to figure out how you are going to convert to even h264 if you are not willing to work with DV....which also happens to be your source.

[anonymous_whatever]

I'm still trying to figure out how you are going to convert to even h264 if you are not willing to work with DV....which also happens to be your source.

DV to h.264... work with h.264 while editing, convert to xVid for final files/cuts

[hech54]

I'm still trying to figure out how you are going to convert to even h264 if you are not willing to work with DV....which also happens to be your source.

DV to h.264... work with h.264 while editing, convert to xVid for final files/cuts

So you are willing to have DV footage stored on your computer at least temporarily?
Do you know that h264 video is much more difficult to accurately edit than DV?

[ejolson]

is AVC-Intra 100 better to use?

AVC-Intra 100 is a HD format that takes 50GB per hour whereas DV takes 12GB per hour. For editing standard definition using a 4:2:2 colorspace I would recommend DV50 as the intermediate.

[anonymous_whatever]

I'm still trying to figure out how you are going to convert to even h264 if you are not willing to work with DV....which also happens to be your source.

DV to h.264... work with h.264 while editing, convert to xVid for final files/cuts

So you are willing to have DV footage stored on your computer at least temporarily?
Do you know that h264 video is much more difficult to accurately edit than DV?

I can have DV footage stored temporarily, yes. That is a necessity here, no matter what route the conversion goes.
I am aware that h.264 is more difficult, yes. Correct me here if necessary in this:

Since h.264 can use only intraframe compression, I can use this with no increased difficulty in editing. I would take the DV, use intraframe compression, and still be able to edit easily while maintaining some quality and a smaller file size.

note that I do realize that h.264 uses intra and inter frame compression, but i have heard it can use only intra frame

[anonymous_whatever]

is AVC-Intra 100 better to use?

AVC-Intra 100 is a HD format that takes 50GB per hour whereas DV takes 12GB per hour. For editing standard definition using a 4:2:2 colorspace I would recommend DV50 as the intermediate.

Excellent to hear a suggestion. So is every frame a keyframe in DV50 video?
Is the codec available for download anywhere?

[hech54]

I can have DV footage stored temporarily, yes. That is a necessity here, no matter what route the conversion goes.:

That is not the impression I got.

Hi,
I want to encode videos using DV to xVid. Working with DV is not an option. Don't suggest buying a large hard drive, getting a new computer or anything that suggests I should work with DV.

I thought you were going to use the analog outputs to a computer capture card.

[poisondeathray]

Since h.264 can use only intraframe compression, I can use this with no increased difficulty in editing. I would take the DV, use intraframe compression, and still be able to edit easily while maintaining some quality and a smaller file size.

No, I would re-read that other thread

h.264 can use intra frame compressoin, and it's easier to edit than long GOP h.264. But intra frame with all the options activated is still more difficult to edit than DV because it's more compressed (more compression means more CPU required to decompress when editing) . Features like CABAC and inloop deblocking for example take a heavy toll on CPU for decoding. You will not like it on a single core, even for SD footage . But if you disable all those features, it becomes almost as bad as older formats compression wise

Excellent to hear a suggestion. So is every frame a keyframe in DV50 video?
Is the codec available for download anywhere?

Yes, intraframe. But you probably don't want this - 2x as large as normal DV. The "50" refers to the bitrate. So lower quality (because it's lossy re-encoding) and 2x the filesize. Lose-lose situation.

[anonymous_whatever]

I can have DV footage stored temporarily, yes. That is a necessity here, no matter what route the conversion goes.:

That is not the impression I got.

Hi,
I want to encode videos using DV to xVid. Working with DV is not an option. Don't suggest buying a large hard drive, getting a new computer or anything that suggests I should work with DV.

I thought you were going to use the analog outputs to a computer capture card.

No, no, DV is fine for temporary storage. There are no analog inputs involved. MiniDV with firewire.

[ejolson]

Yes, intraframe. But you probably don't want this - 2x as large as normal DV. The "50" refers to the bitrate. So lower quality (because it's lossy re-encoding) and 2x the filesize. Lose-lose situation.

The advantage of DV50 over DV is the 4:2:2 color space. A higher resolution intermediate format can make a quality improvement when compositing, color grading and motion graphics are included in editing. How much editing will you be doing?

[poisondeathray]

Yes, intraframe. But you probably don't want this - 2x as large as normal DV. The "50" refers to the bitrate. So lower quality (because it's lossy re-encoding) and 2x the filesize. Lose-lose situation.

The advantage of DV50 over DV is the 4:2:2 color space. A higher resolution intermediate format can make a quality improvement when compositing, color grading and motion graphics are included in editing. How much editing will you be doing?

Absolutely true, But it not for me

For chroma, I usually upsample it differently in other programs than an NLE or AE which use low quality point (nearest neighbor algorithm) resample, even from 4:2:2 subsampling . Also I use uncompressed for compositing. Even the smallest DCT artifacts can negatively impact your compositing

The OP's main goal was to reduce filesize for editing