Evaluating An LG Blu-ray Disc Writer/Player&HD-DVD ROM Drive

[George Tyndall]

Background: Until I discovered the muvipix web site, my chief interest was the creation of slide shows with PSE4.0. My technique was to edit my roughly 2250x1500 high-resolution images in PSE4.0 (about 2MB per image) then save them in PSD format both for paper printing and for the creation of my slide shows. If my customer also wanted a slide show on a DVD, she would advise me what song she liked--it would usually be a popular song with an average length of about 4 minutes.

After burning the DVD, I would create for her, using only the LightScribe software that came free with my computer, a very professional-looking disk title on what appears to be a very expensive disk. (The LightScribe disks are the color of dollars, yet blank disks currently sell for only about $0.50 ). Lastly, I would print with my inkjet printer an equally professional-looking DVD jacket. (That function, by the way, constitutes my one and only use for PSE5.0).

The reason I preferred slide shows that looked like videos to videos made with a camcorder were: 1) most clients wanted images on paper rather than a digital product and 2) the quality of the slide shows that I could create by outputting them as HD WMV 720p looked far better on my HD monitor than anything I'd seen come out of a prosumer camcorder--and I assumed that creating a DVD (with Premiere 3.0) from that output would result in the highest quality DVD of which my particular system (NOTthe system described in my signature below) was capable.

Problem was, although my clients found the quality acceptable, I personally was never happy with the SD DVDs that I was capable of producing with PE3.0. In comparison with what I would see when playing back the HD WMV 720p slide show on my High-Def 1920x1200 24-inch LCD monitor, it was as if I was looking through haze or a diffusion filter when I viewed the DVDs. The SD DVDs that I was creating, when played on a SD TV, were similarly unsatisfying.

But then I discovered the muvipix web site (thanks, Chuck and Steve, for replying to my queries on the Adobe forums).

Membership on muvipix led to the idea of dropping short clips created with a Canon HV30 into my slide shows. I continued to output these as HD WMV 720p, which looked great on my HDD, but again, when viewing my SD DVDs, it was as if I was looking through haze, or a diffusion filter. I mentioned this in a post, and Chuck replied that the SD DVDs he was gettng with Premiere Pro CS3 looked as good as those obtained from downconversion; however, when I downloaded the "trial version," I discovered that the "tryout" version does not allow one to actually "try out" producing a DVD. (Also: = nose bent out of shape.)

The result of that unexpected discovery was that, once again thanks to a post on muvipix, I discovered TMPGENC 4.0 XPRESS, a program that is designed to "filter, enhance and convert your digital video." http://www.tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com With this program I could import my HD WMV 720p files then output them for DVD burning and get quality that was AT LEAST as high as I could get by "downconvertng" from my Canon HV30. That made me VERY happy, because it meant that I would not need to go through the capture/editing process twice, once to produce my HD WMV 720p file then again to produce a SD DVD.

But then a new problem came to the fore: Now, the improved SD DVD quality was causing me to become increasingly interested in producing SD DVDs for my clients--which in turn led to another issue, namely, the increased production time for my particular equipment to burn DVDs in comparison with making paper prints. I posted on muvipix some of the details of my frustraton, and the result was a reply by jackfalbey regarding the possibility of upgrading the CPUs on my 3 machines (at that time I had an E7600 Core 2 Duo 2.13GHz/2.13GHZ on each of my machines).

By the time jackfalbey's post appeared, I had already downloaded the trial verion of Premere Elements 4.0 (PE4.0) for the following reason: I wanted to see if its Media Encoder would give me the same quality as TMPGEnc in the production of a SD DVD. The happy result was my discovery that PE4.0 did indeed give me similar quality--but then, upon discovering that PE4.0 will also burn Blu-ray disks, still another dilemma arose, specifically, I became curious to see how my HD WMV 720p slide shows would look on a HD Blu-ray DVD in comparison with my now much-improved SD DVDs.

Today, I finally found the time to satisfy my curiosity. The following are the results:

Hardware: See my signature below.

Software: PE4.0,* Sonic Express Labeler Version 2.1.0.28. Blu-ray DVD play back is with the LG using the Cyberlink software that comes with the unit. SD DVD play back is with the same player but using Windows Media Viewer.

Length of Slide Show, including Music in WAV format (including lots of custom transitions and pannng and zooming, and also including a video clip): Exacly 4 Minutes.

Media: For creation of the HD Blu-ray Disc: Panasonic BD-RE (re-writable) Single-Layer 25GB disk (1-2X Max Write Speed). For creation of the SD DVD: hp 16X LightScribe DVD+R .

Procedure: After installing the LG Blu-ray writer/reader and discovering that my LightScribe software would not recognize it, I went to the LightScribe web site to download the latest driver, as I wanted to compare not only the quality of the HD and SD videos but also the ability of the LG to create LightScribe titles on the SD DVD..

Results:

Time to Burn SD DVD: 5 minutes to encode, 1 minute to burn, for a total of 6 minutes.

(With my previous E6400 Core 2 Duo processor running at 2.13GHz/2.13GHz, 2Gb of RAM and my Toshiba DVD Burner, the total time would have been more like, if memory serves, 16 minutes. Note to jackfalbey: When you said time to encode/transcode would be reduced with the Q6600, I had no idea of the magnitude of reduction. Did you? Thanks again for your encouragement.

Time to Burn HD DVD: 7 minutes to encode, 5 minutes to burn, for a total of 12 minutes.

Time to Burn LightScribe Label on SD LightScribe DVD with new Q6600 CPU: 3.5 minutes.(Time to Burn the Exact Same LightScribe Label with my previous equipment: 5.37 minutes.)

This photographer's visual impression of the quality of the SD DVD: Looks as good as TMPGEnc gave me, in other words, AT LEAST as good as with downconverting from my Canon HV30.

My visual impression of the quality of the HD Blu-ray DVD: Essentially indistinguishable from playback of the HD WMV 720p file on my HDD.

Note: Both Discs were played back on the same HD monitor.

Observations:

1) Neither the HD Blu-ray DVD nor the HD WMV 720p on my HDD, when played back on my HD monitor, look quite as clear and detailed as the original m2t tapes produced by the Canon HV30.

2) The quality of the SD DVD, although not as high as the Blu-ray and HD WMV versions, is VERY SATISFACTORY, indeed.

(Note: For those of you who are, like me, portrait photographers, my guess is that you will understand what I mean when I say there are plenty of instances when the last thing you want is high-definition. That is why I am still using the same 3.2 Megapixel still camera that i started with roughly a decade ago. )

3) The LG Manual has specific recommendations regarding which re-writable media to use in the drive. The cheapest and most available I could find was the Panasonic, and the best price I could find was $20--yet it is NOT LightScribe-ready, nor is it yet available, to the best of my knowledge, in printable form for inkjet printing.

4) The hp LightScribe DVD+R 16X SD disks are currently selling for as low as $0.50 each--and the ability to put a professional-looking laser-inscribed label on them seems VERY IMPORTANT to my clients.

Conclusion:

I'm not sure that my particular clients--even if they already have a Blu-ray disk player (which most do not)--are willing to pay the premium that I would need to charge, not only for the more expensive media but also for the doubling of the time it takes to produce a Blu-ray disc. Further, as I suggested above, I'm not sure that most would actually prefer higher-definition images of themselves.


Additonal note on the LG (which is available from a number of sources for less than $300, in some cases including a blank disk):

I've played a number of commercially-available Blu-ray and HD disks with this unit and the accompanying Cyberlink software (my monitor is DHCP-ready), and I must say I am VERY satisfied with both the video and the audio quality (my system has 7.1 audio and I may be getting only 5.1, but it's still very satisfactory).

____
*PSE4.0 Settings in Detail:
Project Preset: HDV 720p 30
Source of 720p File on Timeline: Files and Folders (a PSE4.0 Slide Show that Was Previously Output as HD WMV 720p plus an m2t clip that I had previously exported from Premiere 3.0 as an HD WMV file)
Burn to Disc Preset for SD DVD: NTSC_Widescreen_Dolby DVD
Burn to Disc Preset for Blu-ray Disc: MPEG2 1080i NTSC Dolby**

____
**The other option is H.264 1080i NTSC Dolby.

FYI, here are some of the differences between MPEG2 1080i NTSC Dolby and H.264 1080i NTSC Dolby, for my particular 4-minute HD WMV 720p slide show:

MPEG2 1080i NTSC Dolby: Space Required: 770.00 MB (Bitrate 25.19 Mbps)
H.264 1080i NTSC Dolby: Space Required: 617.00 MB (Bitrate 20.19Mbps)

According to PSE4.0 Help, H.264 is a bit more compressed, yet gives about the same quality as MPEG2; therefore, if space is the chief consideration, H.264 is the way to go. On the other hand, if space is not a consideration, but time to complete output is, as in my case, then MPEG2 is the best choice.

Final Comment

Note that with regard to the clip portion of the slide show I started out with an m2t tape, exported it as an HD WMV 720p file so that PSE4.0 could import ("Get") it into its Organizer, then to create the Blu-ray disc I chose to reformat the HD WMV 720p slide show file back to MPEG2--yet, despite all that reformatting and the associated "generational loss," the Blu-ray Disc approaches in quality the original m2t tape. Amazing!

Are you as impressed with Premiere Elements 4.0, a program that Adobe retails for a penny less than $100 (the same price as TMPGEnc), as I am?

[Chuck Engels]

Thanks so much for the update George, this is very informative

[Ken Jarstad]

George, did you try sending your m2t files directly to TMPGEnc using the Lanczos resizing filter as described in the topic on the dvinfo forum? The Lanczos resizer is supposed to be the best according to that topic. The extra info contained in a 1080i program stream could make a difference.

[George Tyndall]

Thanks so much for the update George, this is very informative

Fact: Before I joined this site in May, I knew NOTHING about the creation of movies.

My ONLY use for Premiere 3.0, prior to joining muvipix, was to export my HD WMV 720p slide shows to my iPod, which I carry with me in the field for the purpose of showing potential clients samples of my work.

It was your site that led me to purchase the Canon HV30, and it is the members of your site who have taught me most of what I now know about the production of movies.

In short, it's you and the members of this site who should be thanked. Modesty aside, because of what I have learned on this site I am now capable of producing videos with a level of quality that I never imagined. Believe it or not, some of my clients have been moved to tears upon visualizing the quality of the product that I am able to produce for them in my tiny studio. My special thanks, apart from you and Steve, go to Paul LS in the UK, to jackfalbey in Florida. to John 'twosheds' McDonald, also in the UK, and to Ken Jarstad, "30 miles west of Seattle."

P.S. Given your view of the site you created as "a place you'd like to call home," I'm still contemplating whether it is uncouth to mention the monetary value of what you offer. But then again, in every home there are discussions of budgetary matters, isn't that true?

So please allow me to say this: An onogng concern of mine is that most of my clients, who pay relatively little for what I offer, desire popular music for their slide shows. Given that I am profiting from my work, that brings up the issue of royalty payments to the song's owner, including the prospect of being sued for more than I make in a year (10 years?) from my work which, after all, is only a "sideline" business.

Before I joined your site, I was completely unaware of the existence of shockwave-sound.com, which offers royalty-free music for the very affordable price of as low as $31.95 for the full versions of their music in WAV format, which is the only format that works well for my slide shows. In short, your decision to offer a link to that site on your site is of POTENTIALLY IMMEASURABLE VALUE.

So as I said above, it is I who should be thanking you, not the other way around.

[George Tyndall]

George, did you try sending your m2t files directly to TMPGEnc using the Lanczos resizing filter as described in the topic on the dvinfo forum? The Lanczos resizer is supposed to be the best according to that topic. The extra info contained in a 1080i program stream could make a difference.

Ken, are you asking whether I imported m2t files directly into TMPGEnc then exported as an MPEG2 file for the production of a SD DVD?

For the details of the procedure that I followed, please see my July 17 post, "Using TMPGEnc 4.0 XPRESS to Produce High-Quality SD DVDs."

[jackfalbey]

George, in a very short time you have contributed a tremendous amount of knowledge to Muvipix. I sincerely hope you will stick around for a long time, because as we grow and add new members seeking answers, your experience will be highly valuable to them.

Note to jackfalbey: When you said time to encode/transcode would be reduced with the Q6600, I had no idea of the magnitude of reduction.

Think about it this way (this is a simplified explanation, so if one the Bobs feels like getting more technical, I'll leave that up to them! )... encoding is one area where Adobe has optimized the software to use the CPU's full power. Your previous CPU was a Core 2 Duo at 2.13GHz, for a total of 4.26GHz of "horsepower" available when encoding. Your new CPU is a Core 2 Quad at 2.4GHz for a total of 9.6GHz available when encoding, more than double what you had. Adding in other factors like higher FSB and larger cache, you can see why encoding is so much faster for you now.

[Chuck Engels]

I echo Jack's words, you are a huge help here George and have caused each of us to learn more as well.
We are very happy that you enjoy the site and that we provide a valuable service to you and in turn your clients.
We do hope you are around for duration, how ever long that may be

[George Tyndall]

I echo Jack's words....

Hi Chuck,

Thanks for that.

BTW, I finally got around to writing the long review of the Canon HV30 on the B&H web site that I discussed with you before. It was published it in its entirety, including the following:

I posted some queries ... on the Adobe Forum [@] for Photoshop Elements. The result was a reply by, among others, Chuck Engels, who is the Founder of the muvipix [@] web site. For a membership fee of only $49.95 per year, members are treated to a wealth of tutorials plus lots of free stuff (motion BGs, royalty-free music, and a whole lot more), not to mention unlimited advice from the many experts who participate on this site’s forum.

I wonder if the result wil be a surge in muvipix membership.

[Chuck Engels]

I wonder if the result wil be a surge in muvipix membership.

Wow, Thanks George