Which looks better on TV: DVD or MiniDV

sws1 wrote on 2/4/2004, 5:30 AM

If I want my final product to look the best on TV, then is it better to compress to MPG2 and create a DVD, or push the AVI file back to the camcorder and play the camcorder through the TV inputs?

It would seem to me that MiniDV is better since it's upcompressed

Comments

Chienworks wrote on 2/4/2004, 5:52 AM

Well, DV is slightly compressed, about 8:1 (although the authorities keep saying 5:1, but for the life of me i can't figure out why because anyone with a calculator can plainly see that the files are about 1/8 the size of uncompressed .... hmmmmm). MPEG on the other hand is often compressed 30:1 or more, so DV can potentially be much better than DVD. In practice, the difference is quite minimal. Today's MPEG encoders produce DVD material that is almost indistinguishable from the original. As long as you're not trying to compress enough to cram over 100 minutes or so on a DVD then you probably won't see any difference.

On the other hand, if your original material was uncompressed rather than DV, then it's possible that a DVD version could look better in some aspects. DV uses a reduced sampling resolution for some colors, particularly red. Any sharp diagonal or curved edges around red objects will show a distinct stair-step effect in DV and often looks washed out or bleeds. Of course, a DVD produced from DV footage will show this too, but a DVD produced from original uncompressed footage would be much smoother and clearer in these areas. The problem is getting original uncompressed footage. Unless you are doing computer animation or working in a Hollywood film studio, you're probably not going to get your hands on any.

IanG wrote on 2/4/2004, 5:55 AM

Maybe my eyes aren't as sharp as they once were, but I don't notice any difference with video - some stills have a "sparkly" effect in high contrast areas with MPEG, but I'd go for the convenience of DVD every time.

Ian G.

IanG wrote on 2/4/2004, 5:59 AM

>although the authorities keep saying 5:1, but for the life of me i can't figure out why because anyone with a calculator can plainly see that the files are about 1/8 the size of uncompressed

I think the calculation is based on the data rate.

Ian G.

Chienworks wrote on 2/4/2004, 6:19 AM

The file size is determined by the data rate. Uncompressed 24 bit 720x480 29.97 NTSC video is about 1.7GB/minute and DV NTSC is about 223MB/minute. That's a ratio of about 7.74:1

Former user wrote on 2/5/2004, 12:44 PM

Could the math differences be attributed to Uncompressed being 4:2:2 while DV is 4:1:1?

Dave T2

IanG wrote on 2/5/2004, 3:03 PM

I saw the maths for this only a few days ago, but of course I can't find it now! The author was using 4:4:4 for uncompressed video, but the colour sampling was key to getting to the 5:1 compression.

Ian G.