I could not find specs for a camera called the Panasonic HDS-9, so I'm not sure if you're recording in standard AVCHD or if you're recording as 1080p or 1080i, which can make a difference.
I am also not sure what effects some of your other variables (DVD Shrink, Freecom) might be having on your results.
Apologies the camera model is actually a Panasonic hdc-hs9. Judging by the speed of the iso creation I think that dvd shrink is just repackaging the files as an iso and there is no rendering taking place. I can't say for certain whether the freecom unit is having any effect but I have played 1080i wmv files on it and they do look very good. I know it's a different format but I would assume the unit would have a problem across the board.
Thanks for clarifying, Lou.
Unfortunately, this is a pretty high-level technical question. And, since the people on this forum are just video makers, not technical people (and none of us work for Adobe), I can't guarantee we can get you an answer.
But be patient, and let's see if anyone can offer you any insight.
"What I have found is that the HD 1440 x 1080 preset appears to produce very slightly better quality" is what you say.
I have sought out your camcorder and checked its specifications and found:
From what I have read and what you have said, it sounds like your Panasonic HDC-HS9 is recording AVCHD (video MPEG-4 AVC/H.264; audio Dolby Digital 5.1 channel sound) 1920 x 1080i50 (if you have a PAL version of the camcorder = 25 frames per second or 50 fields per second). At this point, I am not sure if you are recording to the camcorder’s hard drive or to a memory card.
So, I find it appropriate that you select your Premiere Elements project preset (New Project dialog) = PAL AVCHD Full HD1080i25 5.1 channel sound. Typically it is suggested that the project preset be as close as possible to the properties of the imported video to give you the appropriate frame work for editing. This does not prohibit you from making other export choices and downsizing as in this case. Although how well Premiere Elements 7 can downsize is another question. And, I suspect that your imported video has Fields = upper fields first.
If you tell me that you are burning to folder, that means to me that you are creating DVD-VIDEO files (presumed PAL 720 x 576 25 frames per second, with 16:9). And these DVD-VIDEO files would have Fields = lower fields first. And you are going from 1920 x 1080 with square pixels to 720 x 576 with a 16:9 flag. I am thinking Fields issue or 16:9 flag issue. But, then the question comes up, why not for both choices of project preset.
Here comes my questions.
1. How repeatable and consistant is this slight difference that you are seeing and relating to the project preset (New Project dialog)?
2. Are you taking the same video, doing the same edits for the comparison of the project presets of PAL AVCHD Full HD1080i25 5.1 channel and PAL AVCHD HD1080i25 5.1 channel?
3. I may be overlooking something tonight, but I cannot invoke a scenario to target the project presets unless you are doing something grossly different in the edits or using different videos in the comparison.
Since there is a lot going on after the DVD video files are generated, is there any chance you could do a mini comparison creating menus and burning to DVD in Premiere Elements 7 and determine if this difference exists then?
I need to think on this some more to include some aspects that I did not include here now.
Thanks for the in depth reply.
I am indeed recording to the hard drive.
I am creating dvd videos though not specifically for burning to dvd as I convert them to iso so that I can store them on my Freecom Media Player and play them through the TV.
In response to your other questions.
1: The result is repeatable though I am in the process of trying different clips to see if I get the same problems. I have also cut out the creation of the iso file (eliminating the dvd shrink part of it) as the freecom media player can also play ifo files directly. I did this late last night so I have not got around to analysing the results yet.
2. I am using the same video and using the two presets as you list.
I will try burning to dvd to see if the difference exists then. I am also trying the video footage with Pinnacle Studio Ultimate 12.1. This used to be my main choice of program but switched to Premiere as the iso files created from Pinnacle footage would not play on my freecom player if they contained menus. In my opinion If the best features of both products were rolled into one they would make the best product at this price bracket.
I do not know if this is at all necessary in your workflow, but the freeware program, ImgBurn creates very clean .iso files from the VIDEO_TS folders. Now, if Menus are created in this process (can't Pinnacle do an Auto Play, without Menus?*), the resulting .iso would contain these as well in the first .VOB.
Just wanted to throw this out, in case it helps you.
* I have not used Pinnacle since 9.4.3, but would have sworn that from Stuido 7 (my first), on through 9.4.3, it could do Auto Play DVD-Videos, without Menus. Maybe my memory is just too cloudy.
Ok. I have now created two new clips to folder and am now having trouble seeing any difference. This seemed to suggest that the iso creation may have been causing the problem so I created iso files from the video folders. I still was not sure that I could see a difference which in my experience probably means that there is no difference. Yet if I look at the original file I created I can see a difference. My thoughts on this are that the original file is a 5.8 Gb project burnt to an 8.5 GB video folder at the maximum bit depth Premiere allows of 8 mbit. The short clips I am comparing to are also at the maximum bit depth but are only 250 odd mbs in size. My question is, even though the bit depths are the same and should produce the same quality could the extra processing required to turn the 5.8 Gb AVCHD footage into a video folder as opposed to the 250 mb clip have a bearing on the final quality?
Thanks for the post. I have downloaded the imgburn program and will give that a go. I have had another look at Pinnacle and cannot find an option to autoplay.
In theory, they should not - all other things being equal. However, I often see things that go slightly against theory, so I cannot say for sure.
One comment: some time back, Robert Johnson did some tests on Max bit-rate in PrE. I do not recall the version that he used for these, but would assume pre-PrE7. In his tests (he furnished Exported still images), he found that instead of a Max of 8, about 7.9 worked out even better. Why? He could only speculate, but furnished the proof with those still images. This was before the Adobe forum changeover, so his studies might well be lost. OTOH, he may also have posted those to Muvipix, and they may still be around.
Conventional wisdom on the Adobe Encore forum is that a Max bit-rate of 7MB/s will yield the greatest quality vs playability on the broadest range of set-top players. Some have expressed zero problems with a Max of 8. These are under the DVD-spec for bit-rate, BUT one has to consider all of the material - both Audio and Video and any "spikes" that occur in the Transcoding process. None of these spikes can go above the DVD-spec Max. What is that, 105MB/s? I'll have to get out my copy of DVD Demystified and check that exact number - too many numbers for my tired old brain to retain... I do know that Jim Taylor (the author) gives full account and also points to the causes of those "spikes."
Wish I had some iron-clad rsponse to what you see. You might want to look for Robert Johnson's tests, to judge for yourself. Also, note that things might have changed a bit, with later versions of PrE. In the meantime, try jogging your Quality setting down, just a touch, and see fi you get the same quality resluts, that Robert did.
Good luck, and thanks for reporting,