|
|
Posted by PTRAVEL on 10/06/35 11:34
"Jack P" <vidpro40@optonlineDOT.netX> wrote in message
news:Pw6nf.23789$L7.537@fe12.lga...
> I would say that the DV picture does get noisier between generations ----
>
> but I'm not sure that this is the DV's fault or mine as I used to have
to
> bounce a few generations
Absolutely and unequivocally, no! Transferring DV back and forth (with no
editing requiring rendering) results in bit-for-bit copies. There is no
generational loss. Whatever you've seen is either the result of rendering,
or doing something other than transferring data, e.g. transcoding, using the
wrong codec, etc.
>
> down and could definitely see that the blacks and certain saturated colors
> were getting grainyer
>
> with each generation. I did bounce to different codecs though --- like
going
> from regular DV to
>
> canopus real-time DV to Vegas DV, to Quicktime DV -- and I don't remember
> the recompression settings.
If you're recompressing then you are transcoding, and that will introduce
loss.
>
> Now I just hold off and try to keep one timeline and use fewer subclips.
>
> FYI , for the wise asses out there --- I used to be a freelance TV
engineer
> and I really can "see"
>
> the aforementioned GRAIN...
I don't question what you can see, but I definitely question what you were
doing. DV can be copied indefinitely without loss. When you introduce
transcoding and recompression, then you introduce loss.
In terms of the OP's question, transferring DV using a DV-codec-encoded AVI
does not result in generational loss.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "P.C. Ford" <meoh@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
> news:nguop1l9bglvl04ou5scdjijk0tho7ccaf@4ax.com...
> >I know the accepted generationalization is that there is no
> > generational loss in DV. "It's all 1s and 0s."
> > Is that true going from DV to AVI for editing then back to DV? There
> > is recompression going on here.
> >
> >
>
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|