VV3: Editing and rendering MPEG-2 with MPEG-2 source clips

mgarrett wrote on 4/24/2003, 12:03 PM

If Vegas Video 3.0 is using MPEG-2 clips with NO effects, etc, and if it is re-rendered to the identical format, will it re-encode/recompress with a quality loss?

I can understand if I add effects, fades, etc, but what about if Vegas is just being used a splicing tool?

My reason for asking is I want to store alot of DV footage on a hard disk for a long time and eventually edit it to a DVD. MPEG-2 would be nice for the long-term storage because of space.

Mike

Comments

SonyEPM wrote on 4/24/2003, 12:15 PM

"If Vegas Video 3.0 is using MPEG-2 clips with NO effects, etc, and if it is re-rendered to the identical format, will it re-encode/recompress with a quality loss?"

yes, recompression will always take place.

jetdv wrote on 4/24/2003, 12:17 PM

Yes

Erk wrote on 4/24/2003, 12:21 PM

Mgarret,

If you don't already have a digital camcorder, depending on your budget etc., you might look into getting one so you can use inexpensive Mini DV or Digital 8 tapes for long term storage. Not as handy as having the clips on your hard drive, but it will save space and avoid that recompression.

G

JonErik wrote on 4/24/2003, 1:17 PM

Why?

And do you have any plans to upgrade Vegas with a smart render functionality?

Regards

Jon Erik

jetdv wrote on 4/24/2003, 1:35 PM

Here's a couple of urls that may interest you:

http://www.creativecow.net/forum/read_post.php?postid=105103924051415&forumid=24

http://www.creativecow.net/forum/read_post.php?postid=105105821854244&forumid=24

mgarrett wrote on 4/24/2003, 1:59 PM

Thanks for the responses.

I do have a Canon DV camera. My problem is stacks of DV tapes laying around of the family and no time to make the DVD!

I ran an experiment. I took an MPEG-2 file (encoded using DVD NTSC template), removed the audio track and rendered to a 2nd MPEG-2 file using the same template. Even though it re-encoded, I'm not sure I could easily tell that there was a quality loss.

Mike