Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Trying to understand rendering

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4

    Question Trying to understand rendering

    Hello, I am doing some editing on a document taken from a DVD (Vob) to eventually go on youtube. I couldn't get the original. I know that this is a mpeg2 format. Now, when it comes to render it, should I do it in mpeg2 as well or is it going to downgrade an already compressed file furthermore ? Or, is it keeping the same quality (or lack of... in this case...).

    In the audio world, editing stuff in 24/48khz for example and mixing it to a stereo file in 24/48 will not suffer any loss since it's the same as the original.

    Here, I'm confused. When rendering, is it recompressing again or does it keep the same quality...

    You can tell that I'm new at this. I'm very good with audio though

    Thank you
    Last edited by marso; 02-05-2011 at 08:46 PM.

  2. #2

    Default

    Yes, keep the video the same size and format etc. and Vegas, on the unaltered parts, will not re-render them, so you should have minimum loss of quality. You need to have "Enable no-recompress long-GOP rendering" selected in the general tab of the preferences. Other wise known as Smart Rendering.
    Last edited by Midnight Blue; 02-05-2011 at 10:49 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Oh, ok! So, if I modified all the clips say correcting colors for instance, it will then have to render all the clips. Therefore if I use avi with no compression or jpeg2, there will be a difference right?
    Thanks.

  4. #4

    Default

    Yes, if you change all the clips they will all be re-rendered, Using an uncompressed .avi should in theory keep the best quality but they are not practical as they create big files and are very processor hungry on play back.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Yes, I agree. Last question, is mpeg2 the best compromise? I guess it is since that's what's used in DVDs. Or are there better compressions (bigger files but not as big as avi non comp)?
    Cause on a 3min45sec video it goes from 8,54 gig vs 160 meg. The diff kinda blows my mind...

  6. #6

    Default

    I think the choice of format is determined by the final viewing option. ie if it's going on a DVD it has to be mpeg2. If it's for upload to YouTube I would still go for mpeg2. When I used Pinnacle I always rendered out to Mini DV .avi because Pinnacle mpg was a bit lame. BUT now that I use Vegas I always render out to HDV .m2t files because I've got an HD camera now. Well having said that, what I actually have is something different but in a m2t wrapper. This is because my camera produces a format (DVC ProHD .mxf) that Vegas can't edit without a special plug-in, so what ever Raylight (the plug-in) makes is the actual format. Shows how much I know or don't know. The wold of rendering and formats is truly a mysterious one.

    One thing to note is that you really have to find whats right for you with what ever you have to work with. Hows that for ambiguity.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Thanks

Similar Threads

  1. Help Me Understand Something
    By The Green Monkey Gate G' in forum Just for fun
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 11-02-2009, 09:54 AM
  2. What card, please help me understand
    By cheesehead in forum Technology advice and tips
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-24-2009, 10:27 PM
  3. MOV to MPEG WMV AVI Converter Help to understand
    By ortus in forum The Perfect Video Editing PC
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-18-2008, 10:47 AM
  4. Makes you understand why people rip it off.
    By Alan Mills in forum Forum Announcements and News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-07-2005, 12:05 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •