Mpeg2 vs Mpeg4

ropemonkey · #1 (**permalink**) 07-15-2005, 06:28 PM

I've trawled the net and there is very little info on a direct comparison between the two. Basically I video my mountain biking and snowboarding (and any other hi-octane activity I can have a shot at) and the SAMSUNG VP-X110L looks like the perfect tool. But how will Mpeg4 look once edited and shown on a big tv? would Mpeg2 be a better option? I've got a Sony DCR IP7e at the moment and it's one wipeout away from being destroyed!

any help would be great, cheers

Marc Peters · #2 (**permalink**) 07-15-2005, 06:34 PM

Editing MPEG4? *sounds of laughter*.

Not advisable. Imagine editing MPEG2 at the same time as someone rubbing sandpaper all over your face.

Get a miniDV cam and edit with ease.

Mike Thorpe · #3 (**permalink**) 07-15-2005, 07:01 PM

Ignoring Sarky Marc for a moment (behave!), the best thing you can do is make sure that you've got a camcorder that records in DV format.

If you haven't, then the best thing to do would be convert it to DV AVI, usinga tool like virtualDub. MPEG4 offers a better compression/quality ratio than MPEG2, but DV AVI is much better.

Marc Peters · #4 (**permalink**) 07-15-2005, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by Mike Thorpe

Ignoring Sarky Marc for a moment (behave!)

mrlipring · #5 (**permalink**) 07-15-2005, 10:59 PM

yep, get a dvcam then you have the flexibility of knowing it's gonna be easy to edit, and you can always export to whatever format you like.

editing mpeg4 to any degree will be a royal pain in the arse.

ropemonkey · #6 (**permalink**) 07-16-2005, 11:14 AM

cheers Mike, what do you think the end quality would be like after converting Mpeg4 to DV AVI, especially the rapidly moving sceens?

Yes Mark, of course mini DV is a doddle to edit, but the bulk of the cameras and the amount of brittle moving parts in them has resulted in me smashing two of them, hence me seeking out tougher alternatives (i.e. Hard Disk cameras), but thanks for taking the time to reply, twice.

mrlipring · #7 (**permalink**) 07-16-2005, 12:43 PM

if you're rough with them, you really don't want a hard disc camera. Recording to solid state is your only option really.

If the mpeg4 looks good, you'll see almost no degradation when converted to DV-avi.

Marc Peters · #8 (**permalink**) 07-16-2005, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by ropemonkey

What do you think the end quality would be like after converting Mpeg4 to DV AVI, especially the rapidly moving sceens?

MPEG4 is a delivery codec, and certainly not designed for editing. As with MPEG2, the codec uses intraframe compression, which in simple terms means data repeated in a frame is discarded.

Now this isn't a problem for viewing, as to the human eye everything seems as it should. But if you encode this a second time, and then a third, you see generation loss. Added to that the fact that as soon as you try and edit frame accurately you jump several frames at once, and you'll see that editing MPEG isn't a good idea.

High movement scenes won't be a problem: MPEG4 requires a lower bitrate for a given quality, so in theory it's "cost neutral".

To me the idea of recording in MPEG, then transcoding to DV, then encoding back to MPEG for the final version is crazy. You should be looking to the highest possible input quality, and I would strongly advise that you look for a robust miniDV cam.

lummie · #9 (**permalink**) 07-21-2005, 03:11 PM

Basic editing can be done with quick time pro, but its not too nice.

ropemonkey · #10 (**permalink**) 07-22-2005, 06:07 PM

when you say not too nice, do you mean the images are blocky? blurry looking through poor quality? or actually compliing the footage?