The Traders' Den  

  The Traders' Den > Where we go to learn ..... > Technobabble
 

Notices

Technobabble Post your general Need for Help questions here.
Lossy or Lossless?
Moderators

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 2008-05-15, 12:27 PM
vladsmythe's Avatar
vladsmythe vladsmythe is offline
TTD VIP
10.99 TB/4.71 TB/0.43
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Re: Re-encoded digital video

Frankly, a mod using that type of language, I find shocking and reprehensible.
__________________
"Anyone that likes Bob Wills' music is bound to have some good in them."
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #17  
Old 2008-05-15, 12:28 PM
direwolf-pgh's Avatar
direwolf-pgh direwolf-pgh is offline
On the Beach
666.18 GB/1.29 TB/1.99
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: down in the basement
Re: Re-encoded digital video

it is indeed a sad day in VBT. where is the love for the video. whats become of the baby
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #18  
Old 2008-05-15, 12:30 PM
Alex231's Avatar
Alex231 Alex231 is offline
仇連環
1.01 TB/2.17 TB/2.15
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Re: Re-encoded digital video



Thanks for the ticket, 'wolf
__________________
'This ain't employee of the month behavior!!'


Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #19  
Old 2008-05-15, 12:33 PM
Alex231's Avatar
Alex231 Alex231 is offline
仇連環
1.01 TB/2.17 TB/2.15
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Re: Re-encoded digital video

Quote:
Originally Posted by vladsmythe View Post
schmoe, I'm not going to address this any further until you clean up your language and proceed in a civil manner suited to The Traders Den community.
Did you just paste this into multiple threads?

I could have sworn i just read the exact same thing in another thread....
__________________
'This ain't employee of the month behavior!!'


Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #20  
Old 2008-05-15, 12:39 PM
Powderfinger's Avatar
Powderfinger Powderfinger is offline
Rebel, Rogue & Sworn Brother
55.25 GB/234.70 GB/4.25
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Re: Re-encoded digital video

You do realize whom you are dealing with, right??

Next, you can expect a thread started about it...

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmonk
Might as well start engraving Powderfinger on the trophy.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #21  
Old 2008-05-15, 12:48 PM
dementrium's Avatar
dementrium dementrium is offline
433.71 GB/433.00 GB/1.00
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Re: Re-encoded digital video

^^

Yes. It would be a perfect time for a brand new thread in the Site Suggestions area.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #22  
Old 2008-05-15, 12:52 PM
scratchie scratchie is offline
894.51 GB/3.48 TB/3.98
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Re: Re-encoded digital video

Quote:
Originally Posted by schmoe75 View Post
So its ok to transfer analog the worst way possible but not acceptable for digital?
Yeah, exactly. What part of this is confusing you?

Digital video == does not need to be re-encoded.

Analog video == does need to be encoded, one way or another.

Given a choice between a DVD of a 20-year-old videotape encoded on a standalone and no DVD at all, I know which one I'd choose.

Quote:
Apparently reading is something else you have trouble with. I'm not the only advocate dumbfuck.
Ah, yes, another example of the legendary Trader's Den charm[tm].
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #23  
Old 2008-05-15, 01:03 PM
direwolf-pgh's Avatar
direwolf-pgh direwolf-pgh is offline
On the Beach
666.18 GB/1.29 TB/1.99
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: down in the basement
Re: Re-encoded digital video

question on this digital > standalone transcoding

is the transcoding not unlike converting .shn to .flac ?

is there truly a signal quality loss ? I would guess there is no video loss if digital signal > hard drive >standalone recorder

enlighten please

(the ac3 < LPCM audio is simple..i get that part)
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #24  
Old 2008-05-15, 01:10 PM
scratchie scratchie is offline
894.51 GB/3.48 TB/3.98
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Re: Re-encoded digital video

Quote:
Originally Posted by direwolf-pgh View Post
question on this digital > standalone transcoding

is the transcoding not unlike converting .shn to .flac ?
No, it is unlike converting SHN to FLAC.

Quote:
is there truly a signal quality loss ? I would guess there is no video loss..
See above. The only inputs on the standalone are analog. So it's like taking a SHN disc, burning it to audio CD, playing the CD and then capturing that analog audio to hard drive and converting *that* to FLAC. Except that the format in question (MPEG-2) is lossy, unlike SHN, FLAC and PCM.

So there's definitely signal quality loss, and, as a "bonus", the resultant version is 70% larger than the original, superior version.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #25  
Old 2008-05-15, 01:14 PM
direwolf-pgh's Avatar
direwolf-pgh direwolf-pgh is offline
On the Beach
666.18 GB/1.29 TB/1.99
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: down in the basement
Re: Re-encoded digital video

hmmm... Ill have to take your word for it. that doesnt sound lossy to me.

are you saying if the standalone had a digital signal port then all would be well ?

the loss is in the cables ? na. im not sold yet. I need proof & a link.

we are talking lines of resolution here. i doubt that lines of resolution are lost.

I understand the D/A converter part...but tell me about your stereo system - do you run direct digital to the speakers ?

are you running direct digital back into your television ? there are always converters.

i already stated that everyone understands the sound part (if it captures LPCM then all is well)...what about the video resolution ?

help me out - i need a clue on this

Last edited by direwolf-pgh; 2008-05-15 at 01:21 PM.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #26  
Old 2008-05-15, 01:28 PM
saltman's Avatar
saltman saltman is offline
opposite of moderate
TTD Staff
471.23 GB/591.81 GB/1.26
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Re: Re-encoded digital video

Quote:
Originally Posted by scratchie View Post
Given a choice between a DVD of a 20-year-old videotape encoded on a standalone and no DVD at all, I know which one I'd choose.
I'd rather have it computer transferred with proper menus, customized maxxed out bitrates, etc.

Many standalones have firewire and can be in the digital domain. Although some of them go D>A>D internally for some reason, it is not true that they only have analog inputs.

I am one of the opinion that they are of little value and should be banned. They are allowed primarily to increase what is available with the idea that the people that use them can't afford or have the time for a better transfer. That does potentially conflict with other objectives of the site and is constantly being discussed.

Back to the original point of discussion. I agree and IMO it should be looked at carefully in Staff Discussion. Not that the discussion should end here. I just wanted you to know that we are constantly looking into improving and discussing things in staff threads.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #27  
Old 2008-05-15, 01:38 PM
direwolf-pgh's Avatar
direwolf-pgh direwolf-pgh is offline
On the Beach
666.18 GB/1.29 TB/1.99
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: down in the basement
Re: Re-encoded digital video

the bottom line sounds like..there is no loss in resolution. it is not lossy video.

there are more variables of quality issues with a computer workstation than a standalone.
i see video capture cards ranging from $50 to $1500... they cant all be the same quality
or is NTSC/PAL so low grade video it doesnt matter

Last edited by direwolf-pgh; 2008-05-15 at 01:45 PM.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #28  
Old 2008-05-15, 01:40 PM
saltman's Avatar
saltman saltman is offline
opposite of moderate
TTD Staff
471.23 GB/591.81 GB/1.26
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Re: Re-encoded digital video

If done properly. correct. However, you are limited to essentially no menus with random chapter breaks and predetermined bitrates that may not be appropriate to the material being input.

In the example that the thread is discussing. you are potentially incorrect depending on the model. The video could have been needlessly reduced.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #29  
Old 2008-05-15, 01:48 PM
direwolf-pgh's Avatar
direwolf-pgh direwolf-pgh is offline
On the Beach
666.18 GB/1.29 TB/1.99
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: down in the basement
Re: Re-encoded digital video

cool thanks for clearing that up salt. sometimes i get confused.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #30  
Old 2008-05-15, 02:44 PM
AAR.oner's Avatar
AAR.oner AAR.oner is offline
TTD Staff
1.11 TB/1.41 TB/1.27
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Appalachia
Re: Re-encoded digital video

Quote:
Originally Posted by vladsmythe View Post
Frankly, a mod using that type of language, I find shocking and reprehensible.
thats a load of hog shit and you know it Sybil!

if you wanna start yet another drama fest in a non-Lounge forum, and in a technical discussion at that, at least do so using technical arguments
__________________
TTD's Gear Lust Forum -- info & reviews on taping gear
The Basics of EQing
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
Reply

The Traders' Den > Where we go to learn ..... > Technobabble

Similar Threads
Thread Forum Replies Last Post
Can I post very high bitrate H.264-encoded video? - VonOben Technobabble 4 2007-11-03 07:34 PM
Digital Video Cameras? - fowler Technobabble 5 2006-02-26 02:32 PM
JVC GR-DX77 Digital Video Camera - Delgado69 Technobabble 1 2006-02-20 02:39 PM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forums


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:13 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - , TheTradersDen.org - All Rights Reserved - Hosted at QuickPacket
no new posts