They're here! More Muvipix.com Guides by Steve Grisetti!
The Muvipix.com Guides to Premiere & Photoshop Elements 2024
As well as The Muvipix.com Guide to CyberLink PowerDirector 21
Because there are stories to tell
muvipix.com

PE3 and DVD Quality

Discussions concerning Premiere Elements version 1 - 4.

Postby Chuck Engels » Tue Jun 19, 2007 9:04 am

That was version 2 and version 3 may have changed (although I doubt it). Robert sent me samples, one burned at the max 8 and one burned at 5.4, the clip burned at 5.4 was noticeably higher quality especially during movement.

Maybe someone is willing to test it with version 3 :)
I may give it a shot but it will have to wait until July before I can get to it.
1. Thinkpad W530 Laptop, Core i7-3820QM Processor 8M Cache 3.70 GHz, 16 GB DDR3, NVIDIA Quadro K1000M 2GB Memory.

2. Cybertron PC - Liquid Cooled AMD FX6300, 6 cores, 3.50ghz - 32GB DDR3 - MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming 4G, 4GB Video Ram, 1024 Cuda Cores.
User avatar
Chuck Engels
Super Moderator
Super Moderator
 
Posts: 18155
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Bob D » Tue Jun 19, 2007 9:49 am

Like Ken, I'm a bit skeptical too, or maybe just it is hard to believe. But since you mentioned it helped with motion stuff, I have a short project (actually in the gallery) of my nephew playing Lacrosse. I'm going to burn this at 8 and 5.4 just so I can see myself. I'll report back. I use PE2.

Bob D
User avatar
Bob D
Super Contributor
Super Contributor
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 6:00 pm
Location: Arlington Heights, IL

Postby Bob D » Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:11 pm

OK... so I only have PE2 and I tried burning a video with a lot of movement as 5.4 and 8Mps. I then played them back and I did not see any difference (this is a subjective test, rememebr).

To be honest it could be the video source itself. I'm not happy with the quality to begin with and the fact that alot of the action is at a distance probably doesn't give me a good point of reference. But I was surprised that I saw NO difference. I would think I would see some difference.

Bob D
User avatar
Bob D
Super Contributor
Super Contributor
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 6:00 pm
Location: Arlington Heights, IL

Postby Chuck Engels » Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:21 pm

But I was surprised that I saw NO difference. I would think I would see some difference.


Exactly :???:

If there is a lot of movement and the shots are closer I bet the 5.4 would look better. At least it did in Robert's example.
1. Thinkpad W530 Laptop, Core i7-3820QM Processor 8M Cache 3.70 GHz, 16 GB DDR3, NVIDIA Quadro K1000M 2GB Memory.

2. Cybertron PC - Liquid Cooled AMD FX6300, 6 cores, 3.50ghz - 32GB DDR3 - MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming 4G, 4GB Video Ram, 1024 Cuda Cores.
User avatar
Chuck Engels
Super Moderator
Super Moderator
 
Posts: 18155
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Bob D » Wed Jun 20, 2007 2:12 pm

Yeah, I guess I was hoping it would make it better. But they say you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Of course, I'm still looking for "they"! ;)

Bob
User avatar
Bob D
Super Contributor
Super Contributor
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 6:00 pm
Location: Arlington Heights, IL

Previous

Return to Prior Versions 


Similar topics


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests

cron