Why do I get better image quality with MPEG 2 rather than DV?

organism_seven wrote on 6/19/2002, 5:32 PM
Hi,

For some strange reason I am getting better image quality when
I render my files out to MPEG2 rather than DV.
Is this normal?

Specifically, this problem only really shows itself when looking at
text produced within Vegas.

I have made some titles within Vegas for a movie that I have edited,
and when I rendered it out as a MPEG2 file the text was crisp and sharp.
When I rendered the file out as a DV file to print back to tape, the text
has stray pixels along the edges. It looks as though it has been produced
at a very low resolution, but the video footage underneath looks perfect!.
Can anyone offer me an explanation as to what might be the problem?
Thanks.

Regards

organism7@blueyonder.co.uk

Comments

bearded wrote on 6/20/2002, 8:43 AM
I have found that DV codec's whether they are from Vegas or Microsoft are not at all good for rendered and animated text.

I have found this working in VV and After Effects when I want then compress to MPEG.

I found that quicktime (animation quality) is very good for moving text that then can be compressed into MPEG.

If you need to stick with DV add a tiny bit of gaussian blur
SonyDennis wrote on 6/20/2002, 12:47 PM
> If you need to stick with DV add a tiny bit of gaussian blur

I concur; DV doesn't deal well with very high spacial frequncies, like you get with white text on a black background.

///d@
organism_seven wrote on 6/22/2002, 4:05 PM
Hi,

Thanks for the feedback.
I would prefer to save all my edited work as MPEG2,
but I was under the impression that it is best to save
all work as DV to enable further editing if required.
I am also a bit confused about creating files for DVD.
I was under the impression that MPEG2 files are used to
make commercial DVD movie discs.
If that is correct, why is there an option in Vegas to
render files as PAL DVD and MPEG2 using the Mainconcept codec?
If I wanted my files to be written to DVD, should I use the
aforementioned DVD settings or MPEG2 option?
Thanks for any info you can provide.
SonyDennis wrote on 6/22/2002, 6:29 PM
DVD uses MPEG-2, but not every flavor of MPEG-2 works on DVD. The DVD specification picked specific subsets of MPEG-2 functionality for what can go on a disc. For example, MPEG-2 can handle 1920x1080 at 60 frames per second, but there's no way to put that on a DVD and have it play. That's why DVD templates are included for the MPEG-2 file format, and well as the ability to make your own (at your own risk).
///d@
organism_seven wrote on 6/23/2002, 10:16 AM
Hi,

So I should stick to the DVD template for safety!
Thanks for the info.