|
|
Thanks for the link. I'll try 1280×720 60p (16:9) format next. Actually my camera is DV tape so it doesn't take full 1080 resolution, it's the standard NTSC 525 line 60i. I did try authoring the m2ts file from the 60p into 24P and it wasn't a good match-up. It's difficult to go from a 60p rendering into 24p - the motion is "flickery." I found out the reason below.
To get around showing 24 frame film on TVs, I read where the TV industry did a 3:2 pulldown to convert film movies to 60i NTSC broadcast TV. They'd convert 1 film frame into 3 TV video fields and then the next film frame into 2 TV fields and get 24 frames x an average 2.5 fields = exactly 60 interlaced frames for TV. For film media that was filmed only for TV broadcast they'd shoot the film at 30 fps and avoid the 3:2 pulldown altogether because 3:2 can show some motion artifacts.
Taking a NTSC originated avi file (firewire'd from the camera) like mine, rendering it into 60p, and then finally authoring into 24p, PDR wouldn't have any knowledge about the source and a need for 3:2 pulldown. Anyway, the 60p m2ts file that powerdirector did render for my old camera is really beautiful for the way it maintains and actually improves my camera's video (especially with fast motion). I just wish blu-ray would support do the full 1080 x 1920 at 60p so I could see the same result on HDTV (with fast motion) that I see when I play the m2ts on my laptop with a player like powerdvd!
Thanks, Gordon
|
|
|
Hi, new user to PDR11. Finished my first project, a 1:38 hours blu-ray disk. PDR did a great job and I was a little disappointed that I couldn't burn the full 1080 60p, burn would just allow 60i. The previously produced m2ts file is noticeably better for viewing fast motion. So that's a little introduction to what I'm doing.
My mentioned project was first produced into a m2ts file (at a nice 60p, too). Next I authored a disk and was surprised that it took 2:45 hours. Question is... If the authoring is crunching the data again so much on a file that's already rendered, is the blu-ray disk final product going to have less quality from excessive processing? (is it redoing somewhat what's already been done?)? Should I have just skipped rendering after the editing phase and have just gone to the disk burning phase, skipping a m2ts file creation? (or does it really skip this?)
I wasn't able to locate a more specific answer to this question so I hope I'm asking it in a correct venue.
Bottom line: I'm asking if there is a benefit to going directly to burn after editing.
Thanks, Gordon
|
|
|
|
Hi, yes this is a laptop. I had a nice install experience and I'm generally pleased with the software during my "getting acquainted" phase with it. I see that for HD processing that the i7 2.2Ghz processor is the bottleneck in getting the finished result and that disk i/o isn't the biggest concern for performance. That's probably why I didn't find any recommendations for setup. I'll just use the extra 640GB space as just that - extra space. I don't thing there's much of a performance hit at least on the small test projects I'm currently doing. I'll play around with it a little more when I do a longer project. Resules are pretty impressive so far. Thanks for the replies. - Gordonq
|
|
|
I'm going to install PowerDirector today and I'll install it on my C: drive which is a 300GB Intel SSD. I also have my old 7200RPM 640GB HD that I can attach to my Dell eSATA port. It seems that there could be an advantage in having two disks in rendering/processing video. Does someone have a recommendation such as where to put place my input .AVI's or output files? I'd like to use the eSATA drive as it's unused and can hold some input or output files. "Search" didn't locate any information like this. I'm wanting to produce home movies and write in blu-ray format.
Dell XPS15 Intel i7 sandy bridge 2.2GHz
Invidia 540M graphics
300GB SSD
540GB eSATA port
6GB DDR3 memory
1080 x 1920 screen
Panasonic Blu-Ray writer
Thanks
|
