| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 77982 | 2007-03-29 23:40:00 | Buying new advice | mattv (11815) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 536856 | 2007-03-31 07:45:00 | He said: That's correct. A software compressor that encodes raw video will give best compression and quality. The downside to this is it's not very practical. It means recording Gigabytes of raw data, a very fast PC, quality capture card, fast I/O bus, then an overnight process of encoding (and if it's bad, another night). Although, I believe the studios use professional hardware encoders to do this job, and in this regard may be still better than software. For the user, the most practical way of recording video data, either on a PC or a HD recorder box is using 'on the fly' compressed video (MPEG) methods, and I believe a hardware encoder is still better for this than software. But I have no opinion personally as I don't do either. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 536857 | 2007-03-31 08:51:00 | Hes not wrong from his viewpoint...if that makes any sense. But no one messes with RAW footage, You use the huffy codec for capture, Files are about 6 GB per hour, You then edit and encode into your desired format, Like straight into DIVX,or author to DVD. Quality all the way No need to capture to MPEG unless its to be watched and deleted. But even then there are better codecs. The other downside is that Mpeg is a pain in the Arse to edit, Most apps can't do anything with it, and the ones that do re-encode it and ruin the quality, Bad luck if all you want to do is cut out the adds after the recording is done. And as far as I know the studios use Linux clusters running custom built apps. His second paragraph is right on the money, and pretty much what I said earlier, If its a media box then a hardware encoder is the most simple method. I personly never record TV on mine, But rather used it for its capturing abilities, VHS, old camcorder, output from second PC, In this regard the hardware encoder and its lack of abilities would have been useless. Qiuality would have suffered drasticly. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 536858 | 2007-04-01 04:01:00 | Thanks for all your advice. I have read the other threads too and it does seem the Core 2 Duo is the way to go but am still a little unclear as to why perhaps. By the sounds of it a MPEG2 hardware encoder will do the job for me, I do have a little experience editing MPEG2 already as I have a DVD camcorder. As long as you edit with software that doesn't recode everything (ie only recodes the "edits") the results are fine. Does anyone know much about the move to digital tv tho? Is the Hauppauge WinTV HVR1300 card likely to work with terrestrial DTV when it arrives. Am I better to leave that part for a wee while and see what happens? |
mattv (11815) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||