Trust me it's not uncompressed !!!, on the other hand it is at least suffering standard DV compression off tape (25) or perhaps even greater than that...
It is the equiv of VHS tape quality in the old VCR world of SuperBetaHifi, one inch ampex etc.
As videoITguy said, your video is not uncompressed. Instead it is compressed with the DV codec.
However, his other comments are potentially very misleading, but it depends on what sort of video you started with. If you started with standard definition video, then the DV codec is remarkably good and is absolutely nothing like VHS quality. That simply makes no sense. DV NTSC is 720x480, with none of the VHS analog artifacts. VHS is not much better than 320x240, although S-VHS can be quite a bit better than that.
Also VHS tape quality is completely different than the other formats referred to in that same sentence (SuperBetaHifi, one inch Ampex). If by "one inch Ampex" you mean 1 inch type C, that format is so far above VHS quality that it shouldn't even be in the same paragraph, much less the same sentence.
Also, even though DV is compressed using a lossy compression algorithm, the Sony DV codec is so good that tests done in this forum over a decade ago showed that you could compress and then recompress over ten times and still not be able to visually see any difference.
The only downside to the DV codec is that it compresses to a lesser colorspace than uncompressed (or certain other codecs) and the difference definitely can be seen if your original video used a fuller color space. However, if the original came from a DV camcorder then there is, by definition, no degradation. Since you said that you did it a long time ago, then perhaps your source material was DV, in which case, the result you got by using the DV codec will be visually indistinguishable from what you would have gotten saving uncompressed, so you should feel really good about your decision to save it using the DV codec. The only exception to this is that any media generated within Vegas (titles, for instance) will have their colorspace degraded to the DV 4:1:1 colorspace.
Now, if your original video was HD and was then compressed using the DV codec which, by definition, is always SD, then of course there will have been degradation, but that would have happened even if it had been saved as uncompressed.
So, the answer completely depends on where the video came from, and how it was saved originally when the camera stored it.
It is beyond the scope of the OP's question, but I did reference the comparison of compressed DV to the VHS in VCR scenario.
One of the things that is evident from the OP's last remark is "it was difficult to tell the difference in quality" - an observation that reveals just how odd these comparisons are with what is really there. Yes, you might not "see" the difference - hence chain of custody from source and mediainfo app are bit more appropriate to the discovery of what is really there.
Years ago when I worked in the TV station control room - we would typically dub -off Ampex1 inch C to a VHS copy. THen in a blind test on a control monitor could the uninformed tell the difference between the playback of the 1 inch versus the VHS?
I'd think there would be a HUGE difference--stability, horizontal luma resolution, color resolution. But perhaps to a random visitor the difference on a small monitor wouldn't appear as obvious, especially if the random visitor was like the typical TV showroom customer--"brightness" and "color saturation" equals "quality."
One inch C was the "gold standard" for years in broadcast, replacing Quad around 1960-something.
I'd think there would be a HUGE difference--stability, horizontal luma resolution, color resolution. But perhaps to a random visitor the difference on a small monitor wouldn't appear as obvious, especially if the random visitor was like the typical TV showroom customer--"brightness" and "color saturation" equals "quality."Exactly. I have no idea what he is trying to say. The difference is almost as big as the difference between SD and HD. Not subtle.
The video was shot on the Panasonic DVX-100. Makes sense, the video looks OK...but the titles are not the greatest. I am testing now, rendering one version with Project set to 1280 and the DV rendered clips set to "Match Output" and another version rendering the actual project (not the dv renders) to avi uncompressed then I will try to convert it in handbrake.