by Nightowl » Fri Feb 07, 2003 12:09 am
I can't answer the question, but I feel I have to say something since my name was mentioned : ) Besides, one of the Mac editing brethren needs to respond.
And please keep in mind: This is not meant to offend anyone. It's more like a venting of extreme anger I've kept pent up for awhile - i.e. me being tired of being told I don't know shit about hardware when I've been doing this for quite awhile.
That, and I'm pretentious.
The term "lossless compression" is, to me, one of the funniest things I've heard in awhile. It's one of those trendy video terms that means absolute bunk in the real world. If you don't find it amusing, just think about it for a few minutes. This is why, if you want lossless video, you go with an uncompressed card. If you can't work in uncompressed video, you can't work in lossless. These are the simple facts of broadcast quality video - no matter how many stats a company releases, they are just that - stats. We can all use our eyes. If the image quality doesn't look good, it simply doesn't look good. Professionals don't edit in MPEG-2 because it's still quite unstable, and hasn't achieved the quality of uncompressed video.
Most of the newer companies that make video cards these days don't seem to know the basic fundamentals of video. They have their little spec charts and sheets explaining why their card is great and lossless compression and all that crap. Just keep this in mind - most of these cards are prosumer. They'll get the job done. They're fine for AMV creators because we aren't actually going to be broadcasting any of this stuff. Sad but true, I know. Yes, every once in awhile someone gets it screened in Holland or something, but it's very rare.
Why am I blabbing on about all this? Because every ten seconds some kid is talking to me about how his/her card is so much better than mine because he/she was told it is. There are maybe ten people on this forum who truly know their shit about video and could work in it professionally. I get really tired of being mocked due to specs which don't make a damn bit of difference in the first place.
Of course, we all get what we can afford. So here's my advice: DV and MPEG-2 are both very good for low-level, prosumer output. DV is good for editing simply because it's readily available and cheap as dirt. But a good analog capture card can still get a lot better quality. I said GOOD analog capture. That's SDI, kids. If you're cutting in MPEG-2 or DV and you try to start something with someone because they have an uncompressed SDI system, walk away. They'll get all pissy because you have no idea what you're talking about. You hear me?
Oh, but there was a topic...
MPEG-2 is a standard - it's pretty standard for final compression out to lower forms of media for fast, cheap distribution - not an editing format. I rather dislike MPEG-2, if you all couldn't tell.
The Targa3000 is good and all... but not great. In fact, it's rather pricey for waht it can do. There are much better cards out there - but for AMV editing, it doesn't really matter, because it's totally unnecessary.
It's true that if all you're copying from are DVDs then the best quality of compression you'll be getting is MPEG-2 anyway. What's good about analog capture is it can filter out most of the crap and give your project a much nicer picture. If you have component in with a SCSI RAID on a high end capture card, it could make dogs playing poker look like the Mona Lisa, as the saying goes.
Pat originally had a question... Pat, since you're outputting in MPEG-2 for convention presentation and you already have that equipment, why do you want something new? Are you going for something different?
See? I DID address the original post! It took like nine paragraphs, but I did it! This is why I don't post much. After I post this drivvle I'll get one of three responses (or lack thereof): I'll be ignored, I'll be flamed, or I'll be laughed at.
Screw it, I'm tired of typing.
-N