1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

3 hour Recordings at 480 x 576 - non standard?

Discussion in 'Blu-ray & DVD Players & Recorders' started by sdkmway, Feb 4, 2005.

  1. sdkmway

    sdkmway
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    112
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Ratings:
    +4
    On my now departed Tosh DR-1 I recorded a RAM disc that had 3 episodes of a series on, which gave the disc a running time of 3 hours (or there abouts). The files were then ported over onto the PC using DVD Author and then had the adverts cut out using Womble. Womble does not re-encode when you cut so the files to me are still in there original states minus the ads. When I load these back into DVD Author and make a disc, its says they are not PAL DVD standard and wont create the disc. When I load them into DVD Workshop the files sizes are suddenly huge and it appears to want to try and re-encode them.

    The file details are
    480 x 576
    4900 VBR
    25f
    Dolby @ 192
    48khz 16bit

    Ideally all I wanted to do was cut the ads and put them on a disc, like I would normally. Is it because a "non-standard" recording format has been used by the player to fit 3 hours on the disc. Anything around 2 - 2½ hours or 4 hours I don't seem to have this problem when porting and cutting.

    Advice appreciated.

    Thanks
    Kev
     
  2. pjclark1

    pjclark1
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Messages:
    4,411
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Thailand
    Ratings:
    +271
    why didn't you cut the ads out in DVD Author?
     
  3. redsox_mark

    redsox_mark
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,512
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Bath, England
    Ratings:
    +621
    Thanks - the evidence I've been looking for! See recent DR-2 thread. It seems when recording to RAM (VR), all these Tosh recorders use resolutions which are valid for -VR but not video mode for bitrates of 3.0 to 3.8 (approx between 3 hours and 2:20).

    With the XS32 you have a choice with the DVD compatible mode option, if it is off it does the same as the DR1 and DR2. If DVD compatible mode is on, it only uses standard resolutions (full, half).

    That doesn't help you sort out your problem though.

    As it is non-standard, if you want to make a DVD-video I think your only option is to re-encode it with a standard resolution.

    Mark
     
  4. sdkmway

    sdkmway
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2004
    Messages:
    112
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Ratings:
    +4
    To be honest I didn't think to chop the Ads out in Author. I use Womble as its dead easy to do it that way. I think my mind was made up that it wasn't that acurate like adding chapters, even though I've never tried it. DOH!
    I can't for the life of me remember what options I had the Tosh set to. Maybe a lengthy re-encode is the only way.
    Kev
     
  5. stiles

    stiles
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    So let's see if I get this right. On the toshiba in vr mode, you have:

    9.2 to 4.0 Full resolution 704x576
    3.8 to 3.0 Special non standard resolution 480x576
    2.8 to 1.4 Half resolution 352x576

    Or is it half resolution with 352x288 ??
     
  6. redsox_mark

    redsox_mark
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,512
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Bath, England
    Ratings:
    +621
    9.0 to 4.0 is definatly full resolution (regardless of VR or not).
    3.0 to 3.8 is non standard, and 3.0 seems to use 480x576... I'm not sure if there are others e.g. at 3.8 or not.

    2.8 or less is half resolution, again VR or not. At the lowest rate of 1.4, it is 352x288. I'm not sure where the cutoff between 352x576 and 352x288 is.

    Mark
     
  7. stiles

    stiles
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    So the only thing left to find out is where does the cutoff happen between 2.8 and 1.4. This all should be in the manual, or even displayed on sreen in the disc info.
     
  8. redsox_mark

    redsox_mark
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,512
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Bath, England
    Ratings:
    +621
    It isn't in the manual, and I don't think you can get it off the recorder (I can't on the XS32 at least). I've only been able to see the resolution details by putting it on a PC.

    Mark
     
  9. stiles

    stiles
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yeah I know it's not there, I meant they really should put it there. My computer drive is having trouble with all dvd-rw in general...but maybe if I insist. I'll try to test a few recording to find where the resolution drops.
     
  10. redsox_mark

    redsox_mark
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,512
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Bath, England
    Ratings:
    +621
    With -RW, at least with the XS32, you can only write to them in Video Mode (not VR). I know in Video mode, 3.8 drops down to 352x576. And I know 1.4 is 352x288. With some testing I could find when it swaps.

    But my PC drive doesn't handle RAM discs, so I can't check the VR resolutions.

    Mark
     
  11. El_JimBob

    El_JimBob
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    115
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    480x576 in VR mode (recorded @ 3.2) - absolutely 100% sure on that one - checked on a PC (and TMPGEnc absolutely refuses to have anything to do with non-standard resolutions, bah!)

    Seems this prob is consistent across the Toshiba range, then....
     
  12. stiles

    stiles
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I don't see it as a problem. I like having a better resolution than 352x576 for everyday recording. When I record on RAM I don't care about compatibility. I really think its 480x576 between 3.0 and 3.8. I couldn't make my test with my -RW to test the low bitrates resolutions, my pc drive is good for the trash. I'll have to wait to use my computer at the office.
     
  13. SDHoward

    SDHoward
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2004
    Messages:
    250
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +2
    Is it a problem or a feature... seeing as you can switch DVD compatability mode on and off, and set it on by default, I don't see it as a problem.
     
  14. redsox_mark

    redsox_mark
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,512
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Bath, England
    Ratings:
    +621
    Yes, it is a feature, not a problem. The only problem is the manual doesn't explain it very well. Toshiba has decided to provide a choice for these "in-between" bit rates; an optimum resolution which isn't compatible, or half resolution which is.

    It is also an area where the Panasonics are stronger, as they do full resolution up to 3 hours (rate around 3.0).

    Mark
     
  15. stiles

    stiles
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Is it really better on the panasonic? At some point you have to drop resolution to go with the low bitrate. Leaving full resolution with a lot of compression, like 3.0, will produce more artifacts than droping the resolution a little. There has to be enough bits per pixels in every frame. It was visualy obvious back in the days I was backing up dvds in divx. Anyway I didn't see what panasonic can do but I'd like to. We should have a place where we could download samples from every recorders. That would be the best thing to compare video quality.
     
  16. redsox_mark

    redsox_mark
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,512
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Bath, England
    Ratings:
    +621
    Yes, I’ve wondered the same. If one assumes Panasonic and Toshiba allow the same amount of “artefacts” before they drop resolution, it would seem the Panasonic encoder must be better, as it can go down to 3.0 at full resolution. But who knows, maybe the Panasonic would look better if it too dropped resolution earlier? Or, maybe the Toshiba could produce a picture similar to the Panasonic at 3.0 and full resolution, but they chose to drop the resolution as they think the picture is better that way…

    You are right, unless you have both recorders to play with and compare at various rates you can’t tell. Given reports I’ve read, and that Panasonic has been at this game longer, I tend to give the Panasonic the benefit of the doubt that it genuinely copes better that these “borderline” bit rates, but I don’t really know for sure.

    Mark
     
  17. stiles

    stiles
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I finally tested it, only at 1.4 the resolution drops to 352x((288,240)pal/ntsc). Between 2.0 and 3.8 it's 352x((576,480)pal/ntsc) in video mode. Now I only wonder if it's always the same resolution in vr mode between 3.0 and 3.8.
     
  18. redsox_mark

    redsox_mark
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,512
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Bath, England
    Ratings:
    +621
    Thanks - this is good to know.
    Mark
     

Share This Page

Loading...