how much diff is there from vcd-svcd

[maginniss]

was just wondering how much of a difference there is from burning a vcd (cuz thats what i been doing) but i just purchased a diff dvd player that plays svcd.
so is there much of a diff in quality n stuff when makin a svcd?

[ghoster]

heck ya its better but but the amount of video you can put on a cd is about half as you could put on if it was vcd

[maginniss]

thx ghoster...now is there a HUGE differnce in quality or just a lil? like if u watch a vcd then watch a svcd right after...can u actually tell theres a differnce?

[maginniss]

got another question...and im just askin here cuz i dont wanna SPAM the board.

is it possible to copy a dvd to harddrive with just a regular cd burner? then copy it to a blank cd-r? or do u need a dvd rom/burner to do so?

[mickle]

Yes there is a considerable difference.....

and yes you do need a dvd rom.

Mickle

[Mirror_Image]

got another question...and im just askin here cuz i dont wanna SPAM the board.

is it possible to copy a dvd to harddrive with just a regular cd burner? then copy it to a blank cd-r? or do u need a dvd rom/burner to do so?

A CD drive can't PLAY the DVD because it can't READ the DVD. Ask yourself how, in that case, it could possibly COPY the DVD if it can't READ it?

[jrv331]

Over the past week I have made several xvcds and svcds(using the header trick) and I havent been able to tell the difference between them other than the larger file size. Should there be a major difference in picture/sound quality between them?
Thanks
John

[fuzzywuzzy]

was just wondering how much of a difference there is from burning a vcd (cuz thats what i been doing) but i just purchased a diff dvd player that plays svcd.
so is there much of a diff in quality n stuff when makin a svcd?

Think of VCD as being akin to VHS tape quality, while SVCD is more like SVHS or in some cases close to being DVD quality. Like you, my old DVD player would only work with VCDs and though they were good, I could definitely tell they were not the quality of the original DVD. Now my new player works with SVCDs and the ones I've produced are, in picture and sound, nearly the equal of the original DVD. If encoded correctly, there is no reason a SVCD should take more discs than the same movie encoded to VCD. In general, I put most movies onto two SVCDs. If it is a really long movie, or one in which I really want the best possible picture in the most minute detail, I will encode it for 3 or 4 discs, but that is rare.

[Ego_Shredder]

I have captured, encoded and burnt about 100 to 200 CDR's of video and I think that VideoCD is at best, near VHS quality but Super VideoCD is somewhere between VHS and DVD. It all depends on how good or bad your source material is of course.


Generally speaking, SVCD is much sharper with richer colour and more detail and definition, plus everything has a smoother more realistic look. VCD is a little fuzzy looking and doesn't have vibrant colour, but it can be very watchable all the same.


If my source was superb and was about an hour long, I would be tempted to use a single VCD disc, but if it was thirty minutes I would choose SVCD.


I'm just looking forward to the day when DVD Writers are dirt cheap!


Ego

[fuzzywuzzy]

If my source was superb and was about an hour long, I would be tempted to use a single VCD disc, but if it was thirty minutes I would choose SVCD.

I've used an optimized TMPGEnc template to put 60 minutes of video onto one 700mb/80min CD-R disc. It turns out pretty well, better than most VCD, but of course not as good as a higher quality SVCD. In general, I put 45-55 mins. of movie onto a SVCD disc, which means most mainstream films take 2 discs. For something special or deserving of extra-high quality, I've used 3 or 4 discs (used 4 discs for "Lord Of The Rings" for example).