If your footage is AVCHD or DSLR, use AVC for BluRay.
If your footage is HDV, use MPEG-2.

Thank you Kimberly, I'll give it a try!

Hello musicvid:

Wondering why you suggest rendering HDV as MPEG2 for BD. I have used AVC for some tests because it produces a much smaller file and therefore takes less space on the disc. I have an HDV (1440x1080) 7.5 hour project I will put on BD some day. (It takes 3 DL DVD discs.)

I can see why AVCHD rendering to AVC would be good as there should be less or no modification during the renter resulting in better quality.

Thanks for any thoughts.

Paul Masters

Thanks Musicvid,

I tried MPEG2 first but that would get me black frames in the rendered footage, is that because the material is partly from a DSLR?

To be honest I use DSLR (Canon 5D II and Lumix GH2) and also HDV (from a Sony Z5E videocamera in the same project, what would be the best way to render that?

Thanks

Musicvid,

Like others, I am curious about your recommendations for rendering format. Why AVC instead of MPEG2 for AVCHD?

Dave T2

BTW I am very satisfied with the quality of the Blueray when I use MXF as a format, would there be any reason not to do that?

"Wondering why you suggest rendering HDV as MPEG2 for BD."

Because HDV is MPEG-2.
Transcoding to AVC takes additional time, and introduces visible losses, unnecessarily.

But we're not talking smart-rendering here. Yes, the mpeg2 in HDV or .mxf is the same format as the mpeg2 in Bluray, but I have yet to be able to get this to happen without a rerender, at least not in DVDA.

Yes, re-encoding will take place. I too, have not found a way around this.
Transcoding (to another codec) is not necessary and my results were softer..
I'll repeat some tests I did a couple of years back and post the results, time permitting.
MPEG-2->AVC was bad, and AVC->MPEG-2 was horrible, everything else being equal..

MXF -- http://www.pro-mpeg.org/pages/main.php?page=0002
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_Exchange_Format

"MXF bundles together video, audio, and programme data, such as text - together termed essence - along with metadata and places them into a wrapper."

Mpg2 vs. AVC -- AVC/H.264 is more efficient, but takes more resources for encoding & playback, as well as having more quality levels. Encode the same video to mpg2 & AVC using the same bit rate & both resultant files will be close to the same size -- the AVC video however may be higher quality, *depending on your source & the bit rate used*. You can't ever exceed the quality of your original source video, & if the mpg2 bit rate is high enough to preserve that original quality [as much as possible anyway], you won't notice an improvement encoding to AVC instead -- to see a difference you have to reduce the target bit rate to where you see quality loss.

For Blu-Ray/AVCHD that means mpg2 can work fine, or not, depending on the video length & original quality, but using AVC is also more complicated in Vegas Pro... Maybe the MC encoder works for you in 12 [for me the Blu-Ray templates don't with GPU assist], but the Sony AVC Blu-Ray templates are limited in the bit rates you can use -- you can crank the mpg2 bit rate past the AVC max, so if the larger files will work, mpg2 can be higher quality than AVC for Blu-Ray.

In theory your source video matters less than in real life. Different formats store data, particularly color data in different ways. Software methods of translating that color data from one format to another are imperfect, as are most video decoders, including those built into Vegas Pro. Nowadays hardware can play an often hidden role, being involved in decoding/encoding whether you've set GPU assist on/off. Long story short, in Vegas some output formats may work better for you than others depending on the format of your source. Sometimes you might be better off transcoding your source to something like avi using the UT Video codec, or maybe mpg2 at a higher bit rate than your final target, then importing that to the Vegas timeline. If/when a re-size is involved there are two things to consider -- 1) you might find AviSynth &/or VirtualDub do a better re-size than any NLE, & by enough of a margin to make up for the quality loss of encoding an intermediate, & 2) sending the max amount of data to the encoder makes a difference, sometimes for the better, sometimes not -- when you're downsizing & you set your project for the render specs, the encoder gets less data, whereas if your project's set to the source, the encoder does the downsize. You might find it works better one way or the other up-sizing too -- I don't know because personally I avoid up-sizing, letting the player handle that instead.

> "MPEG-2->AVC was bad, and AVC->MPEG-2 was horrible, everything else being equal."

I've gone AVC to mpg2 & vice versa without any problems, & encoded UT Video avi to either with great results. I'm not saying it will work for everyone with every possible source video, but it is possible. :)