I'd like to start a discussion about what constitutes quality video. However, I have a controversial view to what I have read. So my first question is this. Has anyone every downloaded a movie in Divx format, used TMPGENC and Virtual Dub to do the conversion to MPEG-1, burn it to VCD with something like Nero and were amazed at the quality of the Video and said, "dam, I captured my video from my Sony Camcoder with Vegas, Adobe, Pinnacle (whatever you use), rendered it at MPEG-2, NTSC, burn to DVD and thought, this should look a lot better then the VCD video I just did"? Yet, at best the quality is the same and I would think the MPEG-2 would be a lot better then the MPEG-1.

But it does beg the question of why? I ask myself things like, is it DIVX versus the DV format? Yet, I know I'm rendering at 740 x 480 using vegas to MPEG-2 and most DIVX movies I download are 350 x 240 in MPEG-1. The numbers tell me they shouldn't look as good, but they do. What am I not understanding? By the way, downloading movies isn't my hobby, but at times I dabble. Final Fantasy converted to MPEG-1 using TMPGENC and burn to VCD using Nero, looks as good as any DV video captured and rendered to MPEG-2 then burn to DVD

For your info: I use Vegas 4.0. I have a Sony Camcorder TRV50 with 530 lines of horizontal resolution. Surely, I'm not the only one who has wondered about this? Yet, I searched and can't find anyone who has the same question. Thanks for your help....great site!!!!!!!!!!!