SD Dv Avi encode to HD file

[s_kound]

Hello,

For years now i'm shooting video with my sony dcr-pc330 in widescreen, editing in sony vegas and encoding my final dv avi file in procoder, mastering quality to mpeg2 dvd.

I was wondering (taking into consideration that the DV format has a fixed bitrate of 25 megabits per second) if the quality will be better when i encode the final dv avi with procoder to a high definition h264 format (or other format) with max bitrate to view it.

1 hour of Dv avi is 13GB. 1 hour of full bitrate dvd is >=4GB so i guess the compression standard of dvd is really low....

opinions ?

[s_kound]

in order to avoid misunderstandings, i'm not interested on upscaling (ps3 does a really good job). I'm only interested on achieving the maximum bitrate for my dv avi, playable in ps3.

:)

[coordz]

h264 is a more advanced codec than MPEG2 so even at the same bitrate your encodes should be better. If you can then further increase the bitrate the quality will be further improved.

[Blue_MiSfit]

But they will never be _better_ than your source DV. Never. It will always be a tiny bit worse - at least.

H.264 won't always be better than MPEG-2, especially if your content is interlaced. Show me a good, affordable, interlaced H.264 encoder. x264 can't do a good job of it to be honest...

MPEG-2 interlaced on the other hand is very easy to do.

Also, your terminology "high definition h264 format" is a bit misinformed :) High definition refers to the image size - in other words 1280x720 or 1920x1080. Your camera shoots DV - so in the NTSC world that's 720x480. There's nothing inherently "high definition" about H.264. It's a compression standard, just like MPEG-2.

H.264 is more advanced than MPEG-2 - sure - in most cases. It all depends on the situation, the goal, and which actual encoder you're using.

I would suggest keeping your current workflow. Procoder is a pretty solid MPEG-2 encoder IIRC.There is probably nothing to gain by using an H.264 encoder..

~MiSfit

[coordz]

I agree and disagree with Blue_MiSfit. H.264 *should* always give a higher PSNR than MPEG2 but, as previously said, it may not due to implementation issues (i.e. in x264). I think there *are* gains to be had by doing a H.264 encode as your target is PS3. I'd suggest trying both approaches and then looking at the visual difference and possibly at the PSNRs. If there are only negligible differences then stick with your current workflow as suggested by Blue_MiSfit otherwise consider switching.