Dolby Digital and editing software

[Helevitia]

Does all editing software support dolby digital? I am considering buying a camcorder that has dolby digital(stereo) and someone on another forum complained that they couldn't get any sound on anything other than the proprietary editing software that came with the camcorder.

BTW, the camcorder I am considering buying is the Sony DCR-DVD 201. It is the DVD camcorder. If anybody has any opinions on this camcorder, feel free and let me know.

Thanks,
Dave

[Patrick]

Junk

Anyone who buys a DVD camcorder is not a serious video person. It records compressed MPEG video and trying to edit MPEG video is a nightmare.

If you want decent looking footage which you can easily edit, buy a digital camcorder, either miniDV or Digital8.

[Brian Ellis]

I second Patrick. I did an experiment recently, while beta-testing DVD WS2. I used WS2 to capture directly into DVD-compliant MPEG-2. The captured files played fine. I then took them into MSP-7, added a title or two and some transitions. I adjusted the brilliance of one shot. I then rendered it back into DVD compliant MPEG-2 with the same settings. It was AWFUL with just a single re-render. IMHO, don't do it!

[Patrick]

I don't believe it!

Originally posted by Brian Ellis
I second Patrick.

Brian, it's been years since we agreed on anything. I'm shocked!

[Helevitia]

OK, I bought it last night knowing that I could return it within 15 days. My god, the picture is even worse than I could have imagined. I didn't even bother converting it. I literally boxed it back up and I am going to return it tomorrow. Sorry for wasting everyones time. I guess I'll wait 2 more years before buy a DVD camcorder.

Dave

[Brian Ellis]

Re: I don't believe it!

Originally posted by Patrick
Brian, it's been years since we agreed on anything. I'm shocked!

Accidents happen!

Originally posted by Helevitia
I guess I'll wait 2 more years before buy a DVD camcorder.

Sony have a reputation for putting bad technology on the market, such as this, MicroMV and Digital8, in the hopes of trying to steamroller new standards into being. Some are also good technologies which pass (such as the audio mini-cassette). I don't think the DVD camera will be any better in 2 years, as the basic technology of DVD does not lend itself to editing. I have yet to see a good review of DVD cameras in any prosumer level mag I've happened to see. The best one I've seen is the Hitachi DZ-MV350/Panasonic VDR-M30 (these are identical except for the name and model numbers), which were given as very good value for money but relatively poor on features, ease of use and performance.

IMHO, I agree with Patrick (again )and suggest a good mini-DV is the way to go.

[JonH]

I went with digital 8 so that I could play back my old hi 8 videos. Why is mini DV better than digital 8?

[Patrick]

Been down this road before...

Oh lord, don’t get us started on that again!

If you want to read volumes on the topic, do a search here for “Digital8", and to limit it somewhat, use “Patrick” with “Match partial name”. Here’s a couple of my favorite threads from the archives:

Digital 8 or Pure DV

DV v. D8 (again)

Brian and I used to have great fun years ago debating this issue!

[JonH]

Thanks, Patrick. Very interesting. Wish I was smart enough to understand it all. I've been working with mini DV tapes from three different cameras this past weeekend as well as my D8. I can't tell any difference except that the mini DV tape from a JVC camera (which came without a firewire port) wasn't very good. May have been used a few times, I don't know.
Don't think my mother will be able to tell any difference either, which is why I asked the question to begin with. I just need to talk her out of getting one of the new DVD camcorders she's been leaning towards.

[Patrick]

Condensed info

Originally posted by JonH
I just need to talk her out of getting one of the new DVD camcorders she's been leaning towards.

That's one of the few things Brian and I would ever agree on.

Comparing apples to apples, which in this case is single CCD miniDV versus Digital8 (in the same price range), there is no difference in image (or sound) quality. However, miniDV is certainly capable of superior image quality if a 3 chip camcorder is used to shoot footage. But that's comparing apples to oranges...

[Jerry Jones]

Well, I disagree.

I happen to own the Panasonic VDR-M30.

This model records in MPEG-2 format to mini DVD-R or mini DVD-RAM discs.

If I choose to edit this video, I use Ulead MediaStudio Pro 7.0, which can natively edit MPEG-2 video.

When inserting titles and graphics into an MPEG-2 edit project, one needs to set the maximum bitrate at 9800 to get the best quality possible.

When finished, the result can look as good or even better than what one can get with single-chip MiniDV camcorders.

For the Sony DVD cams, one must use Ulead MediaStudio Pro 7.0 - because only Ulead MediaStudio Pro 7.0 supports the editing of AC-3 DVD audio - which is the format utilized by the Sony models of DVD disc camcorders.

The Panasonic DVD disc camcorders utilize either LPCM or MPEG AUDIO.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

By the way, my post assumes the editor will be distributing the final result on DVD.

This means that all edited Mini DV material will have been transcoded to MPEG-2.

So whether one is starting with MPEG-2 or DV - it all ends up being MPEG-2 in the end.

My rule of thumb is as follows:

If the edit project does not require a huge amount of multi-layer compositing, then MPEG-2 can be used as an editing format for simple edit projects - because Ulead's Smart Render technology will help you avoid re-encoding those segments of video that do not feature titles, transitions, or filters.

If the edit project *does* require a significant amount of multi-layer compositing, then DV is obviously the better choice.

But - again - it all ends up being MPEG-2 in the end if the distribution format is DVD.

There are no DVD players - to my knowledge - that can play raw DV .avi files.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

With regard to the new HDV format, I am unable to really judge this new format currently.

My systems aren't fast enough to properly capture and edit the HDV format MPEG-2.

However, I do plan to upgrade when processors hit the 4ghz mark.

At that time, I'll be testing the capture and editing of HDV format MPEG-2.

Based on what I've seen so far, the quality of raw HDV format MPEG-2 when captured by my sub-specification computers is absolutely amazing in terms of sheer resolution.

The true test will be when Blu-Ray and other formats hit the market and we can actually see how the HDV looks when recorded to DVD discs designed for high definition format video.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Patrick]

Quality is in the eye of the beholder

Originally posted by Jerrold Jones

So whether one is starting with MPEG-2 or DV - it all ends up being MPEG-2 in the end.

But - again - it all ends up being MPEG-2 in the end if the distribution format is DVD.

By the way, my post assumes the editor will be distributing the final result on DVD.

Jerry, you assume a lot. I’m glad you’re happy with lossy MPEG-2 captures. I wouldn’t be.

The best way to archive footage is still digital tape, whether it be miniDV or Digital8. Yes, DVDs are convenient for viewing purposes, but nothing more.

In a year or two or three, when newer digital storage mediums are invented and/or marketed, everyone who has shot DV will be able to copy their footage over with no loss of it's superior quality.

It also looks like WMF could be the distribution format of the near future. I’m no expert, but I would hazard to guess that DV converted to WMV would look a heck of a lot better than MPEG-2 converted to WMV.

Will you still be happy with your inferior, compressed, MPEG-2 video down the road? Most people who are aware of the differences wouldn’t be.

[Brian Ellis]

Patrick, wonders will never cease, we are still in agreement. Jerry obviously didn't read my Post #3 on this thread, otherwise he wouldn't have had to add the provisos he put in, as an afterthought, in post #12. I can't see any point in taking a project into MSP unless it is to edit it. And every cm of tape I use goes into MSP for editing, with titles, the odd transition and quite frequent filtering to tweak the image, not to mention odd effects like PinP and straightening horizons or verticals. There is NO way I would want to use DVD-compliant MPEG as a starting point, Smart Render or not. It is a format suitable only for the visually disadvantaged (oooh!, look at me being PC )