|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
December 11th, 2003, 02:48 AM
|
#1 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: CA
Posts: 172
|
Saving as AVI question
Is there any loss of quality if i keep rendering my projects as AVI? For example, I want to edit a clip, then render it as an AVI file... Then I want to insert it into a much larger set of clips and save those as one big AVI. Is there any degredation of quality if i keep rendering the same AVI file over and over?
BTW I'm using vegas 4.0e |
|
|
|
December 11th, 2003, 02:54 AM
|
#2 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: England
Posts: 56
|
Depends what codec you're using..
DV is a lossy codec, hence each compression and recompression degrades the image. uncompressed/full frame avi is a non-destructive codec, but the file size is immense. A halfway house is something like Digital Anarchy's microcosm codec for quicktime, which compresses while simultaneously being non-destructive. It's not a real-time codec though. ie it's great for storage and for sending footage to a client, but for editing and things like that it won't do. Kieran |
|
|
|
|
December 11th, 2003, 02:55 AM
|
#3 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: CA
Posts: 172
|
hrmmm im just using Vegas's AVI uncompressed NTSC codec I guess... I dont mind the big file sizes, i have 2x250GB HDD'S :)
|
|
|
|
|
December 11th, 2003, 03:50 AM
|
#4 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: England
Posts: 56
|
You might want to consider saving as a quicktime .mov instead.. I believe I'm right in saying that the animation codec gives you a smaller file size than uncompressed avi and is also non-destructive.
If you're wanting to archive things then microcosm is only $99, which is pretty good value. Kieran |
|
|
|
|
December 11th, 2003, 04:14 AM
|
#5 |
|
Trustee
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 1,727
|
Kieran, what compression ratios does Microcosm get? I currently archive my footage and things on MPG2 as a size/quality compromise but if this is close to in size (even 2 or 3 times the size) I would live with that for lossless.
Aaron |
|
|
|
|
December 11th, 2003, 04:26 AM
|
#6 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: England
Posts: 56
|
You'd be better off checking out DA's site;
http://digitalanarchy.com/micro/micro_loss.html and if you have any questions then the DA forum over at the cow is the place to go to get answers from the company themselves: http://www.creativecow.net/index.php?forumid=66 Kieran |
|
|
|
|
December 11th, 2003, 06:33 AM
|
#7 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 484
|
Dan there have been many tests made available on the effect of multiple compression cycles on various DV codecs, like MS AVI, Canopus, Main Concept. None shows objectionable degredation in a few compressions. They certainly do vary if you run 10 - 50 compressions but who does?
David Hurdon |
|
|
|
|
December 11th, 2003, 12:38 PM
|
#8 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,750
|
The difference between 1st and 2nd generation DV is hard to tell. Adam Wilt writes that it's indistinguishable.
10 (or was it 50?) generations with Microsoft DV is noticeable. 10 generations with Quicktime DV is noticeable. see codecs.onerivermedia.com vegas's DV codec is supposed to be the same across any number of generations. digitalvideoediting.com has a picture of it in their Vegas review. DV compression is pretty reasonable. I wouldn't go out of my way to avoid it unless you are using really crappy codecs, which you aren't. |
|
|
|
|
December 11th, 2003, 04:43 PM
|
#9 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: CA
Posts: 172
|
thanks guys, got all my questions answered :)
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
