Uncompressed AVI vs NTSC DV

[Jim Snow]

Originally Posted by Oliver Darden

The DVD's are D9, and it's weird they way they do it; they like split the film in 2 and do 2 glass masters, and then put them back together on the dual layer DVD in a black spot (full fade to back) in the film so you cant tell. This is probably normal but this is my 1st time getting a mass amount copies of a DVDs made so it's all new to me.

That's the way D9's are made. A key part of the D9 architecture is the layer break structure that links one layer to the other. The two layers are structured as one as defined by the DVD spec. In fact, if you make an image (.iso) file of a D9, it is one single .iso file with the layer break defined within it.

[Jim Snow]

Originally Posted by Oliver Darden

Ya, they are doing all the authoring and compressing the uncompressed AVI using FCP and compressor so I assume it will be better quality than my MPEG2.

I can understand their thinking in doing it this way. It's the best way from their point of view to insure the best quality. A replication company sees all kinds of stuff, some of it pretty badly encoded. Unfortunately, it's that type of customer who is the first to blame the replication company when the video quality on the finished DVD is bad. A replication company can also accept 100% customer created masters from customers who have the ability to produce the master. They don't have to worry about the video quality in that case because they are simply making digital copies that are the same as the customer supplied master. It's when they are encoding and authoring that there is a potential for finger pointed when the video quality isn't good.