Rendering for DVD

RichMitt wrote on 3/23/2004, 7:13 AM
I am a new user of ScreenBlast and have just completed editing our first project, a wedding video which will probably run about two hours, including the rehearsal, the wedding itself, the shooting of formal pictures, and the reception. We are pretty well satisfied with the performance of ScreenBlast, although it took a bit of time to learn the ropes.

Now we are ready to render the project for DVD and to author the DVD, but we have some pretty basic questions, which we hope you will be able to help us with.

1. Is the output of the rendering process an AVI file or an MPEG2 file?

2. I gather the rendering process takes quite a bit of time. Approximately how long would it take to render a one-hour project, for example?

3. Does the rendering process generate a new file including all of the video clips, audio clips, still photos, and other files that were used in making up the project? If so, that could be a pretty larger file, which of course would require a lot of hard disk space - perhaps as much as the video files that were downloaded from the video camera. Is that correct?

4. With respect to the DVD authoring process, will this require generating yet another new file of the same size? I’m starting to worry about hard disk space. And does authoring require another lengthy operation (time-wise)?

Comments

JohnnyRoy wrote on 3/23/2004, 8:02 AM
Here are some answers to your questions:

> 1. Is the output of the rendering process an AVI file or an MPEG2 file?

It depends on how you will author the DVD. A DVD requires an MPEG2 file. Screenblast ships with MyDVD which wants to encode the DVD file for you so, by default, Screenblast will render an AVI file to input into MyDVD which will then render an MPEG2 file. If you use another DVD authoring tool, I would output an MPEG2 file and eliminate one render step. This also saves on disk space.

> 2. I gather the rendering process takes quite a bit of time. Approximately how long would it take to render a one-hour project, for example?

It depends on how many FX’s, titles, transitions, etc. are in that one hour and what format you are rendering to. Each title and transition needs to be processed and rendered. Each Video FX will cause that event to be processed and rendered.

If most of your video does not have FX’s applied and the video source is a DV AVI file and the rendering target is to a DV AVI file, the render will go quick. In fact, Screenblast will just copy unaltered video from source to target so it’s limited by how fast your hard drives can copy.

If you are rendering an AVI to MPEG2, then every frame has to be converted to MPEG2 so the rendering will be slow. An average computer (i.e., 2.0Ghz) will take between 2x and 3x to encode to MPEG2. So a one hour video would take up to three (3) hours to render. My P4 3.0Ghz takes about 1.5x so a one hour video takes about one and a half hours without FX, transitions or title rendering taken into account. You could easily see 5+ hour or more render times depending on how complex your project is. Just render overnight.

> 3. Does the rendering process generate a new file including all of the video clips, audio clips, still photos, and other files that were used in making up the project? If so, that could be a pretty larger file, which of course would require a lot of hard disk space - perhaps as much as the video files that were downloaded from the video camera. Is that correct?

Yes, that’s correct. Everything on the timeline is rendered out as one big file. If you are rendering to a DV AVI file, then DV takes up 13GB per hour. You will need 26GB of hard drive space to hold your two hour project (not including temp space needed while rendering). If, however, you render to MPEG2 (which is 25:1 compression instead of 5:1 like DV) the files will be much smaller. A 2 hour DV quality MPEG2 file will be around 5-6GB. (hint: you will need to reduce your quality to get 2-houirs on one DVD. You might want to make two one hour DVD’s.)

> 4. With respect to the DVD authoring process, will this require generating yet another new file of the same size? I’m starting to worry about hard disk space. And does authoring require another lengthy operation (time-wise)?

No, the MPEG2 file that the DVD application creates is smaller (approximate 1/5th the size) If you render to AVI from Screenblast to feed into a DVD authoring application, then it will need to render to MPEG2 file. If you render to an MPEG2 file from Screenblast, the DVD authoring program only has to render the menus and copy the MPEG2 to VOB files. This should only maybe 20 minutes depending on if you have moving menus, etc. This is why I render to an MPEG2 right from Vegas and feed that into DVD Architect. (I don’t use Screenblast but did use VideoFactory). Then you have to physically burn it to the disk. Obviously this is dependent on whether you have a 1x, 2x or 4x DVD burner.

~jr
RichMitt wrote on 3/23/2004, 10:27 AM
Very helpful respone, JR. That clears up my questions very nicely. But it generated a new one. You suggested putting my two-hour project onto two DVD's. Is there a practical limit to how much material can be put onto a DVD? My TDK DVD package says they hold 120-minutes. Or is it that there are different quality levels?
cbrillow wrote on 3/24/2004, 5:12 AM
There are different"quality levels", but they don't necessarily translate directly to predictable real-world visual results. There's a very good explanation of this on the -- well, never mind... Maybe I can look up and post a link.

At any rate, a home-burned DVD has a capacity of about one hour of full-quality DV that's been rendered to MPEG-2 format. To fit more on the disc, the encoding bit rate is lowered. The effect of this is not analogous to slowing a tape down to half-speed -- it shows up in a different way that may or may not be perceptible or objectionable. Much depends upon the nature of the video being written. Fast-motion scenes are often a gauge used to judge the effectiveness of a particular encoding rate, because artifacts are often easier to detect than in slow-changing ones.

JohnnyRoy's suggestion is a good one -- he's a great contributor to the forum and his advice is always accurate and articulately-stated. I'd modify his suggestion just a bit, since you're just starting out. Assuming that you have the time, why not try both ways? Make a single 2-hour DVD and 2 one-hour discs, and compare them. They knowledge you gain from this experiment will guide you in the future. You may find that the difference is virtually undetectable, or maybe it's more than you can accept. Only you can make this judgment. Best tip of all: make your tests with RW discs, if your burner can handle 'em... They're more expensive, but you only need a few. They're invaulable evaluation aids.

Moreover, since this is a pretty important event in your life, you'll probably want 1) the best quality you can get, despite the inconvenience of splitting it to 2 discs, and 2) more than one copy.

Have fun!
stefkeB wrote on 3/24/2004, 5:29 AM
On my slow Pentium 3 600 MHz, rendering takes about 1 hour for half a minute of DVD-quality film (but that is with images, overlays, sound & FX). I just finished a first DVD for a 25 minute movie (took 1 1/2 day to render...). It's an AVI-file of 5 GB and turns into a 1,8 GB DVD (including an additional intro & slideshow movie).

Rendering on this PC is slooooow.

I still did not see why I had to render to an AVI-file first and then (in MyDVD) had to "transcode" to MPEG-2.
SonySCS wrote on 3/24/2004, 2:08 PM

I also don't see why you can't go straight to MPEG2 (Make Movie--> Save to Disk (I'm paraphrasing)). Then use the mpeg in MyDVD.

If your mpeg settings are correct, shouldn't this work? The Sonic site has a lot of info and I don't see anything to contradict this. They even say if an avi is over an hour long then it's probably best not to use MyDVD for encoding.

Suzan

JohnnyRoy wrote on 3/24/2004, 2:46 PM
> That clears up my questions very nicely. But it generated a new one.

Don’t you just hate what that happens. ;-)

> You suggested putting my two-hour project onto two DVD's. Is there a practical limit to how much material can be put onto a DVD?

I’ve been able to get 1 hr 40 minutes on a DVD at full quality (i.e., 8K max 6K average kbps). I have also gotten 2 hours on a DVD by lowering the average bitrate to 4.5K and I can’t tell the difference. It looks the same to me. Since you said it was a wedding I figured, why skimp? You can’t get 2 hours and full quality so make 2 one hour DVD’s. But I agree with cbrillow, you should be the judge. Make a 2 hr DVD and see if you like the quality. Use a DVD-RW like he suggested. I burn all of my DVD’s to RD-RW and then play them to make sure the menus look right and perform correctly. Then I burn the final DVD-R if everything looks OK.

> My TDK DVD package says they hold 120-minutes. Or is it that there are different quality levels?

Technically this rating is meaningless. It’s a hold over from VHS tapes. Customers expect you to rate media in terms of time because VHS tapes listed their times at speeds like SP, LP, SLP, etc. but because you can use different bitrates with digital video, time is relative. (ask Einstein if you don’t believe me) ;-) I have gotten 168 minutes of what I consider good quality video on one DVD. That’s 2 hrs and 48 minutes at an average bitrate of 3.1K Kbps. (i.e, 8K max, 3,1K ave.) That’s 4 episodes of your favorite 1 hour TV show which is only 42 minutes once the commercials are removed.

As cbrillow pointed out; just like the quality of VHS at SP is better than LP, the quality of 1 hour of video is better than 2 hours of video because the DVD has a 4.7GB limit. Use our advice as a guideline and do your own comparisons and see for yourself.

~jr
djcc wrote on 3/24/2004, 7:24 PM
I have to ask the same question as Suzan - why not go directly to MPEG-2? I do not yet burn DVDs.. still waiting to buy a burner. However, why go first to AVI, then do MPEG-2 when MS supports a straight render to MPEG-2?

=Don=
mbryant wrote on 3/25/2004, 5:53 AM
You can encode straight to MPEG-2 in Screenblast.

But I always create a .avi master as well, which I output to DV tape and archive. Also useful if you need to make any VHS copies. Then later I make the MPEG-2 file and DVDs.
RichMitt wrote on 3/25/2004, 9:19 AM
Pardon my ignorance, but what is DV tape? Is this some sort of backup drive system? The reason I am asking is that I have a ton of digital still photos on my machine that I would like to archive, but it would take too many CD's. What are my options?
JohnnyRoy wrote on 3/25/2004, 10:12 AM
> why go first to AVI, then do MPEG-2 when MS supports a straight render to MPEG-2?

That’s a good question for the Screenblast developers because it’s my understanding that this is exactly what Screenblast does when you click on Make DVD!

I don’t have Screenblast or MyDVD. I was under the impression that MyDVD wouldn’t accept external MPEG2 files. Otherwise, I agree with you; Why on earth would Screenblast create an AVI file (by default) to feed into MyDVD when you press the Make DVD button? It makes no sense and uses more disk space.

I have VideoFactory 2 and Vegas 4+DVD so I’m just going by what comments I have heard from others. Sorry if it was misleading to anyone.

> what is DV tape?

That's the tape in your DV camcorder. Under Make Movie, select Print your Movie to DV tape. This sends an AVI file back out the firewire port to your camera where you record it back to tape.

> I have a ton of digital still photos on my machine that I would like to archive, but it would take too many CD's. What are my options?

Get a DVD burner for $80 and back them up to 4.7GB DVD-R’s.

~jr
allyn wrote on 3/25/2004, 12:55 PM
i *have* screenblast and i've never understood why the "make dvd" button creates an avi which gets handed off to mydvd which then encodes it into mpeg-2. seems like a colossal waste of time and disk space.

you can definitely create an mpeg-2 from within screenblast and import that directly into mydvd (although the audio gets uncompressed i believe). it works just fine. (i need to do this anyway because i have to edit the mpeg-2 file with dvdpatcher to set the 16:9 aspect ratio, which screenblast is unable to do apparently due to marketing reasons).
RichMitt wrote on 3/25/2004, 9:39 PM
Lets see if I have this straight ( Incidentally, I plan to get DVD Lab for authoring, not MyDVD). If I want to simply burn a DVD, I would need to render in MPEG2 format, which ScreenBlast does by default when I select the "Burn It to DVD" option in the Make Movie Wizard. However, there is an advantage to rendering in AVI format because I can then archive a backup on my camcorder tape. To do that, I would have to select the "Save it to your camcorder's DV tape" option in Make Movie, correct. Then to make the DVD, I would delete the rendered AVI file from my hard disk (to free up space) and then re-render in MPEG2 format for DVD Lab? Is this correct?

P.S. Thanks JR for the hint on using DVD for archiving the pictures. I assume I can drag and drop files to the DVD drive in Windows Explorer just like I do when saving to CD.
IanG wrote on 3/26/2004, 12:30 AM
You'd save time by starting a new project, importing the rendered avi and rerendering that as an MPEG-2. How much time would depend on how many and what sort of transitions and fx you had.

Ian G.