Log in

View Full Version : Whats the BEST AVI codec


Really Ripped
14th January 2003, 21:37
I'm currently converting all my Grandfather's 8mm film onto my MiniDV camcorder, by filming the 8mm off the Projector Screen.

I'm using PINNACLE SYSTEM STUDIO 7.15 to transfer the MiniDV recording onto my HardDrive.

I CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE A DVD BURNER. I want to keep ALL this 8mm film footage and save it in some type of Hi-Quality AVI format. I then want to burn it onto CDR in the meantime until I can later convert to DVD.

Besides just saving the AVI as the 'Original Uncompressed DV Video' (which takes alot of MB's) what other AVI codecs are really GREAT at perserving the video until I'm ready to burn it to DVD?

List of AVI codecs I currently have:
> INDEO video 5.10
> CINEPAK codec by Radius
> INTEL INDEO(r) video R3.2
> PINNACLE DCxx MJPEG Compressor

NeVeRLiFt
14th January 2003, 22:19
The three best loseless codec's are Huffyuv, Mjpeg and DV so try them.

cjv
15th January 2003, 01:37
Neverlift is 100% correct about the 3 best capture codecs..and in that order, quality-wise.

Of what you currently have, if you don't want to buy/install another codec (BTW HuffYUV is free), I would imagine "PINNACLE DCxx MJPEG Compressor" is miles above the rest of your other choices.

cjv

bb
15th January 2003, 08:14
Originally posted by cjv
Neverlift is 100% correct about the 3 best capture codecs..and in that order, quality-wise.
Huffyuv is lossless only, whereas MJPEG and DV codecs are mostly used in their lossy modes. In terms of quality all lossless modes should turn out about the same (not regarding color space differences and lossless DCT rounding differences). All these codecs use key frames only, which is important if you want to cut the video later.

If you want higher compression, then the quality of DV codecs is superior to the quality of MJPEG codecs (mainly because of the dynamic quantization tables). There are minor differences between the codecs from different vendors, too (DV / MJPEG).

Huffyuv compresses about 2.5:1, compressed DV 5:1, compressed MJPEG depends on the quality factor (typically 10:1).

bb

^^-+I4004+-^^
15th January 2003, 08:50
all of you skipped this

>I then want to burn it onto CDR in the meantime until I can later convert to DVD

line........but if guy likes to burn hi quality mjpeg,DV or indeed huff
to cdr's then it's fine.....

for storing video to cdr,you will prefer some flavour of mpeg4
codec (wether it be divx,xvid or,or...)
but then you won't get optimal quality when converting to
dvd's.........

so you can
a)wait for that dvd burner and use DV as a starting point for mpeg2 stream
b)burn now to cdr's in mpeg4 at highest possible bitrate..........
(highest possible mpeg4 would be 6000kbit/s ie. perhaps cca.10-15min on 1 cdr.....no,i didn't calculated that i'm just guessing....)

cheers

Ivo

bb
15th January 2003, 12:43
... or save the original footage on a DV tape. That's probably the best option for best quality on DVD later without sacrificing a whole lot of CD-Rs. But for that the camcorder must have DV-in.

what other AVI codecs are really GREAT at perserving the video
MPEG-4 codecs aren't really GREAT for later conversion to MPEG-2, although they're not bad. You'll lose quality, and it's hard to preserve interlacing (ok, you could separate the fields and encode them as frames, then weave them back later).

bb

^^-+I4004+-^^
15th January 2003, 21:12
>... or save the original footage on a DV tape.

and that's true.......


>You'll lose quality, and it's hard to preserve interlacing

mpeg4 has support for interlaced content,btw. and it works.....
(sure as hell it works better than mpeg2..even in that sense!)
anyhow i have trouble outputting that (and interlaced mpeg2 too) to my tv-out if i keep it interlaced....so it's a no-go for me........

and he requires no interlacing support of any kind,as he's transferring film (8mm)
so it's not an issue.......

bb
16th January 2003, 08:19
Originally posted by ^^-+I4004+-^^
and he requires no interlacing support of any kind,as he's transferring film (8mm)
so it's not an issue.......
Yes, but if his camcorder doesn't support progressive scan - which is very likely - then you may get trouble with the flickering. You'll probably have to use Donald Graft's fabulous Deflicker filter, but to deal with interlaced content I fear you have to separate the fields.

bb