Page 1 of 1
DVD writing technology
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 7:43 am
by Ned Flanders
Just wanted to start a thread regarding DVD writers and see if anyone out there is using them yet. They are really coming down in price. I've got the lowdown on the different writing tech's (DVD -R -RW +R +RW and RAM(we've gone back to disc cartridges

)
I just ordered a QPS -R -RW USB 2.0 DVD writer. Main purpose is for video editing at work (and converting my old VHS tapes on the side). We've also got a digital camcorder so I picked up a firewire card, a USB 2.0 card, and NEO magic Pro and Pinnacle Studio 7 DVD writer/editor software to get a benchmark of video compression vs. quality. Another program I considered picking up was Adobe's Premiere Studio.
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 7:56 am
by Mr Sleep
Originally posted by Ned Flanders
Just wanted to start a thread regarding DVD writers and see if anyone out there is using them yet. They are really coming down in price. I've got the lowdown on the different writing tech's (DVD -R -RW +R +RW and RAM(we've gone back to disc cartridges
)
I just ordered a QPS -R -RW USB 2.0 DVD writer. Main purpose is for video editing at work (and converting my old VHS tapes on the side). We've also got a digital camcorder so I picked up a firewire card, a USB 2.0 card, and NEO magic Pro and Pinnacle Studio 7 DVD writer/editor software to get a benchmark of video compression vs. quality. Another program I considered picking up was Adobe's Premiere Studio.
I know that set top boxes are currently about a grand

And the media is darn expensive, as with most of these things, i am wating for price to come down.
What Graphics set up have you got to cope with the transfer from VHS to DVD? How are you going to account for the poor quality of VHS? Adobe is usually a decent company to go with in my experience

Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 8:12 am
by Ned Flanders
I was intending to play vhs video out of the vcr and run it out to a digital camcorder. Then you export the video to the pc via the fire wire card. The key is finding a good compression engine so you can fit a movie on one dvd. Right now, without compression, a dvd will hold 32 minutes of good audio/video.
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 10:06 am
by Gwalchmai
*thinks to himself*
Hmmm. 32 minutes would be plenty of time to make some nice little DVDs of the kids to send to the grandparents at Christmas....

Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 10:11 am
by Ned Flanders
that's how this all started, gwally. However, I convinced the workplace it would be a handy tool for archiving all the video data we collect (our company specializes in machine vision technology).
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 12:28 pm
by Bloodstalker
Makes for a good storage place for all the ghosted image files we keep at work for our student labs to. Just in case something happens to the server.

Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 3:23 pm
by Ned Flanders
Indeed BS. also going to use it as another point of redundancy (we already have RAID5 and tape backup) for archiving our software builds.
And now, we'll return the DVD writer discussion to the residential market. Take it away, HLD; something about avi's
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 8:06 pm
by HighLordDave
@Flanders:
Mr Sleep, Bloodstalker, Gwalchmai and your boss are obviously using computers for purpose other than the primary one that God himself intended. It saddens me to see DVD technology used for such mundane purpose as sending grandparents pictures of their grandchildren, video editing and backing up data. What is this world coming to?
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 8:58 pm
by Ned Flanders
HLD has subliminally summed up the intended purposes of new video technology and the Internet. I hope we've all learned something today from the high lord's wise words.
Posted: Sat May 25, 2002 1:17 pm
by KidD01
Originally posted by Ned Flanders
HLD has subliminally summed up the intended purposes of new video technology and the Internet. I hope we've all learned something today from the high lord's wise words.
Amen on that ! Dave's one tech hippe allright
@Ned : I'll wait to hear your results

Posted: Sat May 25, 2002 1:35 pm
by Mr Sleep
Originally posted by HighLordDave
@Flanders:
Mr Sleep, Bloodstalker, Gwalchmai and your boss are obviously using computers for purpose other than the primary one that God himself intended. It saddens me to see DVD technology used for such mundane purpose as sending grandparents pictures of their grandchildren, video editing and backing up data. What is this world coming to?
My boss does use his non-region DVD for many reasons, such as imported DVD's from America that feature...."interactive" rooms

I think you get what i am talking about

Safe to say thay had me more than a little shocked

Posted: Fri May 31, 2002 10:35 am
by K0r/\/f1@k€$
Originally posted by Ned Flanders
Right now, without compression, a dvd will hold 32 minutes of good audio/video.
Then why are we switching to DVD? VHS can hold about eight or ten times that amount. This seems a little strange for something that has been hailed as a 'digital revolution' or some such rubbish.
Posted: Fri May 31, 2002 11:14 am
by Ned Flanders
VHS generates analog quality and have a much shorter lifetime. It isn't really a fair comparison. The upgrades in video quality, audio quality, compact size, durability, and lifetime longevity are a few factors qualifying as the 'digital revolution' as you put it. Plus the added convenience of viewing the contents of a disc on PC, being to able to access exactly what you want in seconds. All these factors may only qualify as amenities, however, people love better and faster.
The compression isn't rocket science either. It is a fairly simple process which will outpace VHS technology.
Posted: Fri May 31, 2002 3:20 pm
by K0r/\/f1@k€$
You speak sense.
I hadn't really thought about it that fully, and I now agree with you.
As far as the analog bit goes, how is analog worse quality? I know that analog is a signal which can take any value whereas digital is only a 0 or 1 so a digital signal is less prone to degradation and errors in transmission etc. I guess that answers my question

but assuming perfect quality transmission/reception, wouldn't analog allow for much more compressed data such as an ASCII code transmitted as one analog bit instead of a digital byte with the bit being able to take any value from 0 to 255?
Posted: Fri May 31, 2002 11:40 pm
by Ned Flanders
I could gather stats on the analog vs. digital compression ratios and post some info here. Such compression comparisons is an integral part of the technology we develop at my workplace.
Posted: Sun Jun 02, 2002 2:46 pm
by K0r/\/f1@k€$
Please do, if you have a spare moment - I'd would be worryingly interested

And plus, I might be able to up my geek points

Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2002 2:55 pm
by Ned Flanders
Corn Flakes,
It's not that I'm ignoring posting the stats but rather, the ones whom I could gather that info from, are not around this week.
Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2002 5:49 am
by K0r/\/f1@k€$
Thanks, I await their return with eager anticipation.
