A gaggle of DV & AVI file types

[Steve House]

In looking over info on the Firestore disk I ran into a list of various file formats, all or ostensibly AVI files, that it can record. Disregarding any issues relating to direct-to-disk recording and looking just at the file types themselves, can anyone rundown the differences, other than the obvious such as Matrox cards capture using the Matrox AVI codec, between :

RawDV
AVI Type 1
AVI Type 2 & AVI Type 2 24p
Canopus AVI
Matrox AVI
Pinnacle AVI

Are there any quality or usability issues that distinguish these file formats from one another or other reasons to prefer one over the other? Ask because if, for example, the Canopus codec produced better images than did the Matrox codec and one was shopping for a capture card, that would certainly enter into the selection equation. I'm assuming one's NLE could handle any of them but I don't know that that is true - do some NLEs require a specifc codec?

[Chris Hurd]

The manufacturer-specific formats are compatible only with those makes of capture cards. For instance, AVI Type 2 C or perhaps it's Canopus AVI will properly operate only on a Canopus system. So there's your usability answer. As for quality, that's really getting into subjective territory. I'm a huge Canopus fan and their codec has rightfully earned a very loyal user base. Many folks choose Canopus because of the strong reputation of their codec. I think the big difference in NLE's isn't the image quality... there might be a *minute* difference that some people can detect but others can't... but the big difference is in the feature sets and interface. I would choose the NLE whose feature set I needed the most and whose interface appealed to me most, because that would make me a more productive editor.

Focus is to be saluted for including such a broad range of file-format compatibility in the FireStore product line.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

The manufacturer-specific formats are compatible only with those makes of capture cards. For instance, AVI Type 2 C or perhaps it's Canopus AVI will properly operate only on a Canopus system. So there's your usability answer. As for quality, that's really getting into subjective territory. I'm a huge Canopus fan and their codec has rightfully earned a very loyal user base. Many folks choose Canopus because of the strong reputation of their codec. I think the big difference in NLE's isn't the image quality... there might be a *minute* difference that some people can detect but others can't... but the big difference is in the feature sets and interface. I would choose the NLE whose feature set I needed the most and whose interface appealed to me most, because that would make me a more productive editor.

Focus is to be saluted for including such a broad range of file-format compatibility in the FireStore product line.

I'm more interested in the capture card issue - Matrox, Canopus, Pinnacle, something else. A Firestore is down the road a piece for me if at all so what files it does or doesn't support isn't of immediate interest. But a capture card purchase is imminent. Since one of the key differences is the file format they capture in, the file format that gives the best performance, however one might define "best", becomes the deal maker in selection of capture card, assuming it's otherwise compatible with one's choice of NLE.

(That's why I didn't post it here initially - it's only coincidence that I got to thinking about it while looking at Firestore info about the files they support and was hoping to isolate the discussion from anything Firestore-related or direct-to-disk recording per se - it's really a capture card question.)

[Mark Whittle]

Steve, you might find this article interesting:
http://www.matrox.com/video/products...t_it_wrong.pdf

I don't want to get involved in the "which brand is better" debate; as Chris says, it's the feature sets and interface that count. I happen to be a happy Matrox user but I could just have easily been a Canopus user. At the time "I paid me money and made me choice" and chose the features that suited my needs. When it comes time to upgrade I'm not loyal. I might jump ship to FCP, who knows?

The article reinforces my belief that you need to listen to all opinions & arguments, get your hands on the gear (very important), and make an informed decision based on what YOU think is best for you at the time.

Aside from the technical info in that article, it is interesting to see the lengths these companies go to to discredit each other in order to sell more stuff, and the danger of believing a company's marketing material.

As far as answering your question about the quality of codecs, I can only trust my eyes. IMO any difference is insignificant compared to the image quality difference you can make at the other end of the process: the camera/lens & production methods used.