DVD Rendering From HD Still a Crap Shoot?

Brian Luce · April 26th, 2011, 08:06 PM

TMPG adds a little time to your workflow versus staying purely in Vegas. But in Vegas I always render the audio separately -- not so in TMPG. If a person is happy with the image quality with a 100% Vegas workflow, then no need to change. If you don't want to spend, but want better quality, Virtual Dub is your boy. If you want to spend a little for better quality the $99 TMPG is your ticket. If you have more money, Cineform has solutions and it goes up from there.

Christopher Young · April 27th, 2011, 08:03 AM

I guess what I am saying is that everything we do for the networks is shot in XDCam HD, edited in XDCam HD and finally delivered as a program to the network as a 422 50-mbit program master on an XDCam disc. The last time I tried TMPGEnc it could not accept a 50-mbit MXF file as an input file. I have had great results out of TMPGEnc but not when I had to go through an intermediate step just to be able to input a file. If that has changed I will give it another go. What I need is the minimum of transcoding loss and what most certainly works best with these files with only one step with minimal loss to MPEG-2 is MainConcept's Reference. It supports the following codecs.

■Blu-ray Disc MPEG-2
■XDCAM HD
■XDCAM EX
■XDCAM IMX [SD]
■DVD
■Video CD
■Super Video CD
■HDV

Everyone’s workflow is different and as the bulk of the footage we work with comes from the XDCam and EX range of cameras it works well for us. Admittedly not super cheap at $510 but over a thirty odd show run more than worth its price. In the end what works best for each individual's workflow is the best answer. Happy encoding!

John Peterson · May 2nd, 2011, 06:11 AM

Missing from this entire discussion is the CRT TV. They are still plentiful. Lots of homes in the world have them.

I think if you send these tests from a standard (non-upscaling ) DVD player to a CRT television, you will get very different results. Most will look really bad.

John

Roy Alexander · May 3rd, 2011, 02:35 PM

In my previous post I said how the audiance thought there was little difference (for them) between a blu-ray disc and and SD when using an upscaler and an HD TV. Since then I have invited an audiance to view the same SD videos on a 6 foot screen played with an SD cheap player through an SD projector.
Without exception they thought the images were very good. (obviously the images weren't as good as a Blu-ray projected image) but the point is, without anything to compare with, the audiance were very happy with the result. It goes to show that all the striving for perfection by certain video producers is not always appreciated by audiances. Actually I have never been asked for Blu-ray copies when giving the client the choice.

April 26th, 2011, 08:06 PM	#31
Brian Luce Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,290	Re: DVD Rendering From HD Still a Crap Shoot? TMPG adds a little time to your workflow versus staying purely in Vegas. But in Vegas I always render the audio separately -- not so in TMPG. If a person is happy with the image quality with a 100% Vegas workflow, then no need to change. If you don't want to spend, but want better quality, Virtual Dub is your boy. If you want to spend a little for better quality the $99 TMPG is your ticket. If you have more money, Cineform has solutions and it goes up from there.

April 27th, 2011, 08:03 AM	#32
Christopher Young Trustee Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 1,572	Re: DVD Rendering From HD Still a Crap Shoot? I guess what I am saying is that everything we do for the networks is shot in XDCam HD, edited in XDCam HD and finally delivered as a program to the network as a 422 50-mbit program master on an XDCam disc. The last time I tried TMPGEnc it could not accept a 50-mbit MXF file as an input file. I have had great results out of TMPGEnc but not when I had to go through an intermediate step just to be able to input a file. If that has changed I will give it another go. What I need is the minimum of transcoding loss and what most certainly works best with these files with only one step with minimal loss to MPEG-2 is MainConcept's Reference. It supports the following codecs. ■Blu-ray Disc MPEG-2 ■XDCAM HD ■XDCAM EX ■XDCAM IMX [SD] ■DVD ■Video CD ■Super Video CD ■HDV Everyone’s workflow is different and as the bulk of the footage we work with comes from the XDCam and EX range of cameras it works well for us. Admittedly not super cheap at $510 but over a thirty odd show run more than worth its price. In the end what works best for each individual's workflow is the best answer. Happy encoding!

May 2nd, 2011, 06:11 AM	#33
John Peterson Major Player Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Monroe, NY Posts: 703	Re: DVD Rendering From HD Still a Crap Shoot? Missing from this entire discussion is the CRT TV. They are still plentiful. Lots of homes in the world have them. I think if you send these tests from a standard (non-upscaling ) DVD player to a CRT television, you will get very different results. Most will look really bad. John

May 3rd, 2011, 02:35 PM	#34
Roy Alexander Major Player Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 354	Re: DVD Rendering From HD Still a Crap Shoot? In my previous post I said how the audiance thought there was little difference (for them) between a blu-ray disc and and SD when using an upscaler and an HD TV. Since then I have invited an audiance to view the same SD videos on a 6 foot screen played with an SD cheap player through an SD projector. Without exception they thought the images were very good. (obviously the images weren't as good as a Blu-ray projected image) but the point is, without anything to compare with, the audiance were very happy with the result. It goes to show that all the striving for perfection by certain video producers is not always appreciated by audiances. Actually I have never been asked for Blu-ray copies when giving the client the choice.