Nightshot editing

TinaF wrote on 4/1/2006, 4:16 AM
I have a DVD Handycam 403E, and have done some work filming with nightsot mode which I am very pleased with and would like to copy to full size DVD. However when I tried to import from the handycam I received the message that one of the files (the nightshot one) cannot be copied. Anyone else had this problem and have you solved it?

Comments

ScottW wrote on 4/1/2006, 9:28 PM
My experience with DVD handycam disks hasn't been that great. This is from the perspective of someone that tries to copy the mini-dvds to large format for customers.

In my most recent experience, we could not read with a computer, 3 out of 4 DVDs because of data errors on the source disk - the only way to copy them was via an analog process; basically, playing the DVD back in a player (which was more forgiving than the computer) and capturing the analog output (s-video) to another DVD copy.

The best way to solve your problem, IMO, is to abandon handycam DVD recorders and go with a DV camcorder.

--Scott
TLF wrote on 4/1/2006, 9:48 PM
My understanding is that DVD and HDD cams record using MPEG2, a file format that was never designed to be edited because it is a 'final format' meaning it is the end result obtained AFTER the editing process is complete.

For this reason, and given my experience with editing MPEG2, I would never consider using a device that does not record uncompressed video.

Tape-based digital video cameras may be little larger, record not much more than an hour of video, and transfer video to PC in real-time, but offset that against all the problems of editing with MPEG2 and I'd rather use tape!

Worley
Chienworks wrote on 4/2/2006, 4:01 AM
Worley, just to point out something ... DV tape is compressed. Without compression you'd only be able to fit about 8 minutes of video on a 60 minute cartridge!

The major difference between DV compression and MPEG compression is that DV consists of independant frames while MPEG consists of groups of frames. In order to decode an MPEG frame many previous frames must usually be accessed and processed. In DV each frame stands independant of the others and can be accessed much more quickly (and sometimes more reliably).
TLF wrote on 4/2/2006, 6:08 AM
Thank you for the clarification. I knew that MPEG is very heavily compressed; essentially you get one full frame, then the next x number of frames record only the changes between frames (gross oversimplification).

I didn't realise that DV-AVIs are compressed.

Am I right, though, that MPEG should really be considered a final format, due to amount of compression applied? So much information is thrown away that it it is virtually impossible to recreate it, edit, then recompress without loss of quality.

Since using AVIs, I notice just how much faster the editing process actually is, and I've never had a loss of sync. between audio and video.

Worley.
ScottW wrote on 4/2/2006, 8:17 AM
MPEG-2 is generally considered a delivery format, not an editing format.
TLF wrote on 4/2/2006, 9:18 AM
Just what I thought!

Now, if only my TV capture card would capture to AVI. For now I've set it to the max. MPEG2 constant bit rate that I could (12 Mbps).

I suppose I could capture to MPEG, load into Vegas (or Movie Edit Pro) and immediately render to DV-AVI, then edit that... Of course, all my experience has come from editing MPEGs and it's only the last month I've been editing AVI's not realising just how much quicker and smoother it would be. And the end results are so much better.

Ah well, all part of the learning process, and all good experience. Lots of mistakes made, but my skills are better for it.

Worley
Chienworks wrote on 4/2/2006, 11:58 AM
Check your capture software and see if you can set it to capture MPEG-2 with only I frames. If you can do that you'll eliminate the groups of frames compression. That way editing should be pretty spiffy, nearly as much so as using AVI. 12Mbps is about half the rate of DV, so the quality should be fairly decent. MPEG-2 uses less color compression too, so your colors may be more faithful to the original than DV.

MPEG is becoming an editing format. HD camcorders record MPEG-2 directly to tape, and no one would suggest that this recording is unsuitable for editing purposes. True, it is a very time-consuming hog to work with, but the people who designed HD systems certainly intended the recording to be editable.