I am on a brief visit to Germany and England (I normally live in North
America). I was considering buying a DVD Camcorder but heard that there
may be a compatibility problem since most of Europe uses PAL format
while the Americas rely on NTSC. I am completely ignorant of what this
means though I did have a look at the relevant Wikipedia articles.

My bottom line question is whether I should forget about buying over in
Germany or Britain (I have found some great deals on Sonys and
Panasonics)?

You'll need an NTSC camcorder for use in North America, and, to the extent
they're available, will be more expensive in Europe.  NTSC and PAL are
incompatible video standards, the latter being common in most of Europe
(SECAM being a less common, but equally incompatible, European standard).

Since you're buying a DVD camcorder, I assume neither video quality or
anything more than minimal editing is of concern to you.

Show quoteHide quote

Thanks for the information and I also am interested in the last comment
you make. I do not know much about competing formats: are you saying
that the Mini DVs or some other format os preferable? Although I won't
be into editing much (I suspect), image quality is important and I'm
wide open to your advice on this.


PTravel wrote:
Show quoteHide quote

DVD is a delivery medium, not a capture medium.  Video DVDs store video
using mpeg2 compression.  Mpeg is a lossy, temporally compressed format.
"Temporally compressed" means that the transcoder uses frames both ahead and
behind a reference frame, calculates what has changed, and then stores only
the changes.  For mpeg2 to yield high-quality video, it must do multiple
analysis passes to calculate optimum compression.  Commercially-produced
DVDs use multiple analysis passes on high-quality transcoders, which is one
of the reasons they look so good.  The built-in hardware transcoders on
camcorders do single-pass analysis and do not result in optimum compression,
so video quality suffers.  DVD-compliant video also tops out at a bit rate
of approximately 8-10 mbps and uses compression ratios of about 10 to 1 (or
more).  Note that when a camcorder manufacturer claims "DVD quality" video,
they do not mean you will get the same quality of video that you're used to
seeing on commercial DVDs.  What you get is "DVD quality," all right,
because it comes from a DVD.  It is, however, degraded video and does not
remotely approach commercial DVD quality (or even what you can get burning
your own on your home computer using good quality consumer software).

miniDV uses the DV-25 standard.  It is not temporarlly compressed, i.e. each
frame is compressed individually, without reference to preceeding or
forthcoming frames.  This allows for very efficient, optimized compression
in the camera.  DV-25 compresses at about a 5 to 1 ratio.  DV-25 has a data
rate of 25 mbps, i.e. 2.5 to 3 times more video data per second than DVD.
Accordingly, miniDV is considerably less compressed and captures
considerably more data than DVD.

If you looked at _only_ the format in which the video is captured, miniDV
yields an obvious and rather dramatic advantage, i.e. all things being
equal, video from a miniDV camcorder will look significantly better than
video from a DVD camcorder.

However, there are other factors that determine video quality besides
bit-rate, compression ratio and temporal vs. non-temporal compression.
Video quality is also determined by such factors as sensor size, quality of
electronics and, most significantly, quality of the lens on the camera.

DVD camcorders are designed to appeal to the same consumers who purchase
disposable film cameras, i.e. those who are "technically challenged," and/or
want a very simple and inexpensive solution to capturing images.  As a rule,
DVD camcorders have tiny CCDs, low-quality lenses and sell themselves on the
basis of gimmicks, e.g. built-in "special effects," "digital" zooms that
produce an unusable and degraded image, long optical zooms that further
reduce light sensitivity and introduce all sorts of optical defects,
distortions and chromatic aberrations, etc.  Note that there are plenty of
miniDV cameras with these characteristics as well -- crappy cameras aren't
confined only to DVD camcorders, and manufacturers produce low-end miniDV
camcorders that will produce video every bit as bad as that from a DVD
camcorder.  However, miniDV has evolved into a stable prosumer/professional
format -- feature films have been shot on miniDV ("Open Water" and "28 Days
Later" are two that come to mind), the BBC uses miniDV cameras for
electronic newsgathering (ENG), and good miniDV cameras can produce video of
the the highest quality.  Note, too, that, while there are prosumer miniDV
camcorders, e.g. the Sony VX2100 and Canon XL2, there is no such thing as a
prosumer DVD camcorder.

If you care about video quality, get the best miniDV camcorder you can
afford.  Sony and Canon make some pretty decent mid- to high-end consumer
machines, but you won't find them on sale for $300.  If you really care
about video quality, get a 3-ccd machine (3 sensors, one for each primary
color, instead of a single sensor with a mosaic filter on top).  However, do
_not_ get a low-end Panasonic 3-ccd machine -- these were designed
specifically to sell to consumers who had heard about the advantages of
3-ccd, but didn't want to spend the money for a prosumer machine (the VX2100
has a street price of around $2000, the XL2 around $3,000), and represent
good marketing rather than good engineering.  You'll get better video from a
comparably priced single-ccd Sony or Canon.

Things to look for:

The bigger the CCD the better -- 1/6" is too small, and will have absolutely
dismal low light performance.  You won't be able to use it indoors or at
night.  1/4" is better, but still not very good.  A camera with a 1/3"
sensor would be best (again, for comparison, the VX2100 uses 3 1/3"
sensors).

The bigger the physical size of the lens, the better.  More glass passes
more light, which will improve the low-light performance.  Also, to get a
reasonably wide field of view requires a large lens.

Look for Zeiss optics -- not required, but an indicator of a good-quality
lens.

OIS (Optical Image Stabilization) provides smoother looking video than EIS
(Electronic Image Stabilization).  On Sony machines, OIS is called "Super
Steadyshot," whereas EIS, in Sonyspeak, is just "Steadyshot."  I don't know
whether there is such a thing as a camcorder without stabilization of some
sort, but it's an absolute requirement if you don't want your video to look
like Dad's 8mm movies.

DON'T get more than a 10x or 12x zoom.  As I indicated, long zoom ranges on
consumer camcorders degrade the image and lower the light transmissivity of
the lens.  Also, no one can hand-hold more than 12x without the image
shaking so badly (even with image stablization) as to render the resulting
video unusable, so this is useless feature.

DON'T be fooled by gimmicks like built-in special effects, wifi, BlueTooth,
USB connectors, so-called "digital zoom" (which merely lowers the resolution
of the resulting image), still imaging capability (see below), etc.  The
standard for transferring video from digital camcorders is the 1394/Firewire
port.  USB is only for transferring still images, or streaming low-quality
video, e.g. as a webcam.

DON'T buy a camcorder based on its still imaging capability.  As a rule, the
higher resolution for the still image capability of a camcorder results in
lower low-light sensitivity and, usually, more digital artifacts in the
video.  No camcorder will produce stills remotely approaching the quality of
even an inexpensive p&s digital still camera.

And, finally, a word about editing.  Not everyone wants to edit their
videos, and that's fine. However, if you think you might ever want to, know
that, unless you're going to do only simple cuts-only edits, editing the
mpeg2 video from DVDs is difficult to impossible.  You'll be limited to a
very narrow range of entry level consumer products, and you won't be able to
do the kind of sophisticated titles, transitions, effects and corrections
that even the most basic DV-codec-encoded AVI editors (which is what you get
when you transfer miniDV to a computer) can achieve.  You might not wish to
edit your video some day, but you also might find that your DVD-Rs are
unreadable -- no one knows the archival quality of these things, though I
have DVD-Rs that I burned five years ago, some of which are now error-ridden
and unreadable.  miniDV tape, on the other hand, is stable and, like all
digital tape, when properly stored will last for decades.

Probably more than you wanted to know, but there you go.


Show quoteHide quote

In article <9Qoog.124166$dW3.66***@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
[Excellent and informative summary snipped]

Actually not :-) , personally, I have been looking for good summaries
like this without much success, so thanks for posting it. Hope it helps
the OP, too.

I want to know about editing software, though. I just bought a Canon
MVX35i (might be an Optima 500 or so in the US) and have made a few
quick shots and transferred to a DVD. Not entirely happy with the
quality so far, but I am more curious about software at the moment.

I have a Mac and transferred from the camera using Firewire with iMovie
and used iMovie/iDVD to make a DVD. Is the process of rendering the
video onto the DVD a fixed process or do the various apps do it better
or worse. That is, if I bought Final Cut, and used it instead of iMovie,
do I just get a lot more editing capability, or do I get a better visual
result on the DVD (starting from the same camera-video, that is) as well?

Thanks,

-- tim

Show quote Hide quote When transferring digital video via the Firewire port, a bit-for-bit copy of
the data is created, so there should be no generational loss.  I'm not a Mac
person, so I don't know anything about iMovie, but whatever is capturing the
video should store it as DV-codec-encoded AVI -- this preserves the native
format of D-25 video.  If you're software is transcoding to anything else,
e.g. mpeg, you'll lose quality.


Video isn't rendered to DVD.  The process should be this:

1.  D-25 video is captured bit-for-bit to a DV-codec-encoded AVI.
2.  The video is edited, i.e. transitions, titles, effects and corrections
are added.
3.  The edited material (anything other than simple cuts) is rendered, i.e.
the software creates new frames that incorporate the title, effect,
transition, etc.
4.  The resulting finished video is transcoded to mpeg2.  Transcoding is the
actual translation of the D-25 video to mpeg2, which is required by DVD.
5   The DVD is authored, i.e. menus are added and the mpeg2 is sliced into
DVD-compliant VOB files.  The video isn't altered, but merely repackaged to
comply with the DVD spec.
6.  The DVD is burned.

Some software, mostly entry level, will do all six steps.

From the standpoint of video quality, step 4, transcoding, is the most
critical.  Mpeg2 is a lossy, temporally-compressed format, i.e. data gets
thrown away by this step.  Which data and how much of it gets tossed is
determined by the transcoding software.  The transcoder has a lot of
decisions to make about how to compress the video.  As a rule, the most
optimal compression takes the longest time.  Accordingly, entry-level
packages usually introduce signficant compromises so that transcoding
doesn't take too long.

If you're getting poor quality video, it's not because of the editing
program (Final Cut Pro is an editing package), but because of the
transcoding.  As I said, I don't know Mac, so I can't make any
recommendations.  On my PC, I edit in Adobe Premiere Pro, a prosumer-level
editor comparable to FCP.  Though Premiere can burn DVDs from the timeline,
I only use it for editing.  Once my project is finished, I save it as AVI
(or frame serve, but that's another discussion altogether) and then use a
program called tmpgenc, which is a dedicated standalone transcoder.  To give
you an idea of what I meant about compromise, transcoding a 2-hour video
with tmpgence tweaked to its most optimal settings for video quality can
take up to 20 hours on my 3.2 Ghz P4 with 1 gig of RAM.  Once the video has
been transcoded to mpeg2, I author in Adobe Encore and burn with Nero.  The
DVDs that I produce approach commercial DVDs in technical (if not artistic)
video quality.


Show quoteHide quote

In article <4gfsoiF1nco2***@individual.net>,
[...]

Show quoteHide quoteThat's very helpful. Part of my ignorance was which step took place
where. That's clear now and much appreciated.

-- tim

I recommend you take the imovie/iDVD course on:

http://movielibrary.lynda.com/html/modPage.asp?ID=175

My wife got her new dual core intel iMac about two months ago, and I
had some old DV footage I wanted to make a DVD out of, and as I had no
experience with video editing, I found that one month of subscription
was $25 and 12 hours well spent.

One thing that affects rendering quality in iMovie is if you are
rendering in the background or not. They warn against this in the
course, and that is the default.

The single-ccd Canon Optura 60 and the Sony DCR-HC90 both are comparable in
price to the 3 ccd Panasonic PV-GS300 (actually the Panasonic is cheaper)
and according to this review http://tinyurl.com/pp466 , the Panasonic has
considerably better video performance. Upon what do you base your claim that
the 3-ccd Panasonics are inferior than the comparably priced Sony and Canon
single-ccd units?

news:7vFog.148196$k%3.29649@dukeread12...
Show quoteHide quoteThe video that I've seen from them, as well as the specs and, particularly,
the CCD size.  There's a reason why the VX2100 costs $2200 and the Panny
costs $650.  Take a look at what the review had to say about low-light
performance.

However, I'm not going to argue about it.  I've given my opinion, and it's
different from yours.  That's fine.  Feel free to disagree, and feel equally
free to recommend otherwise to the OP.

For what it's worth, I've found Robin Liss' site to be, at times, bizarre in
its recommendations and reviews.  However, your mileage may vary.
Show quoteHide quote

Show quote Hide quote I'm not trying to argue with you. I don't doubt that a $2200 unit is going
to be superior to a $650 unit. I'm just trying to get information for my own
future purchase. I don't plan to spend more than $600 for a camcorder and
the GS300 looked like a good value. I don't much care for Sony's touch
screen approach but I'm also interested in Canon offerings. BTW, I'm
replacing an old Digital8 that requires costly repair.

news:plGog.148205$k%3.32398@dukeread12...
Show quoteHide quoteSony uses HAD ccds, which give its machines somewhat better low-light
response than those of other manufacturers.  The Panny has 1/6" CCDs -- no
way will these perform will under low light, and the review confirms it.
People like to use camcorders at night, indoors, etc.  Frankly, there aren't
any in the consumer range that perform well under these conditions (though
there used to be).  Unfortunately, manufacturers seem think consumers want
small, light, multi-funciton and gimmicky, rather than high-quality.

Bottom line is this: if you like the quality of the video, get the
camcorder.  Be sure to try it under realistic conditions, e.g. most stores
are much better lit than most homes -- find a dark corner.  Video scenes
with strong horizontal lines -- that will show up digital artifacts.

I opted out of the consumer line and bought a VX2000 some years ago because
I couldn't find anything that remotely approached the quality I expected.


Show quoteHide quote

In previous reply, I forgot to ask: if I went for the other format
would that still involve the problems with PAL versus NSTC or is that
not applicable to other formats?


PTravel wrote:
Show quoteHide quote

This applies to any format, DVDR or other DV formats.  Further, your charger
may not be a universal frequency and voltage type.  This idea is frought
with the potential for buying something useless.

You would need to find a universal format device, and these, on any
continent, are expensive!

Yep.  NTSC and PAL refer to video formats, i.e. what you watch on a
television.  There are such things as dual-format monitors, but I guarantee
that you do not have one.  In Asia, DVD players that can handle both PAL and
NTSC formatted DVDs are common, but they are much rarer in the U.S.  I've
found them on occassion as no-name loss-leaders at places like Best Buy and
CompUSA.  They last from 6 months to a year and then break, but for 30-40
bucks they can't be beat (I have in-laws in China, so I frequently buy
PAL-formatted DVDs when I go to visit).

Show quoteHide quote

The PAL/NTSC/SECAM divide is applicable to all non-HDTV video formats.
(And with HDTV there's another divide)

Regards

It means that your TV at home, as well as your VCR or indeed any of
your video equipment will not understand the output of the European
camcorder. You'll have gibberish on the screen.

You should forget about it. As a general rule, one should not import
video equipment among different markets, unless it's a multistandard
device and you positively know what you're doing.

Regards

The most complex DVD menu?
DVD's Played through VCR
Anyone use DVD Profiler?
NTSC/PAL Question
DVD protect