Wts(jmanz)
Forum Replies Created
-
Nathan,
If you are just going to be doing standard definition dvds’, then you might be able to Scenarist in the 20K range, or perhaps a bit less as the HD versions start becoming more popular. If you are looking at getting into the latest version of Scenarist, then you are talking a whole lot more. If your company is looking into getting into authoring at this high level and have the capabilities of essentially all dvd types; then Scenarist is hard to beat.
However, you will find that Scenarist will require you to do a lot more on the front end for asset preparation, because you need to make your menus and the like and then import them. If you are looking to the future and want to be able to encode for HD discs, then you will need to get an encoder that handles the various HD codecs in addition to the standard definition mpeg2.
If you want an application that looks and feels like Maestro, then DVDStudioPro on the Mac will be familiar.
jim
-
You can’t go wrong with Scenarist, if it doesn’t bankrupt you. If you add in Cinevision, you better be ready to fork out close to 6 digits. It doesn’t sound like from your initial post that you have been working in that cost range to produce dvd’s to date? It’s a pretty big leap to take it you are intending to integrate HD type discs in your workflow. The cost for this version of Scenarist is pretty expensive, but one can’t argue it’s track record.
Good Luck, it’s interesting times and I don’t think anyone really knows how the whole HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray will turn out.
Jim
-
Rich,
I know the answer is not what you wanted to hear, but it is the reality of things. There really are optimal solutions to the limitations you are facing.
Years ago, Spruce technologies offered a lowly ($99) app called SpruceUp. It would allow for some rudimentary links, and it bundled as a part of the disc build a built in dvd software player (Syzergy). It solves one of the problems, that being the potential lack of a dvd decoder on the recipient PC. However, it doesn’t solve the problem that you will most likely face with the target computers you post–that being relatively severe restrictions on any software loading on PC’s from personnel other than designated IS/IT employees. I can tell you from personal experience in the medical field that this is the norm, and not the exception. These PC’s often have electronic medical record applications and digital xray imaging viewing and archiving. The corporations can’t run the risk or expense of any Tom, Dick, or Harry loading programs that might conflict, and worse yet, introducing viruses/worms/trojan horses/etc. system wide.
There is an expense to having a dvd player due to mpeg 2 licensing costs. Maybe that’s why MS didn’t bundle it in and jack up the price of their OS. I don’t know why they don’t include it, and it sure would make things simpler if they would. You can distribute your content as mpeg1, but playing the files and launching web links will not be as eloquent or straight forward for the viewer to use. You could put your content in a Powerpoint presentation (again you face the potential limitation of the recipient computer not having the software to play it, but even if the computer doesn’t have PP installed, there is a freebie viewer that the link could be included on your disc, or even the actual executable). You could play your video clips (mpeg1), and have URL links/buttons on the slides.
If you have a Mac, Keynote does a great job of giving you a variety of output options. You can create Quicktime files with slides that play you video, and slides with hyperlinks to the web. The quality is excellent. Of course the viewer has to have Quicktime installed, and there are some system requirements (to play H264 files), especially the need for WinXP (which is not necessarily on all your target PC’s).
In the end, I don’t think there is a single best solution. Even if you could come to some agreement with a third party vendor to allow you to include a dvd software player, you can’t bank on the fact that the ulitmate viewer will have the ability to even load it.
Jim
-
It still needs a dvd decoder. This application doesn’t get around the basic issues that eDVD enhanced discs face–that being the system needs a software dvd player and mpeg decoder pre-installed.
Jim
-
Rich,
I think it’s a converstion you have to have upfront before doing the project. Although most computers with dvd players or combo drives installed have an mpeg decoder, many corporate computers do not have that software installed. Many or most corporate computers have the user privelges locked down so employees can’t install software, including software dvd players and or mpeg 2 decoders. You need to pony up with the IS department and corporate representatives to have a frank discussion about what the minimum system specs are required to view a rom enhanced, dvd video title. Some computers (although this is becoming the rare exception) don’t even have the ‘horsepower’ to play back the video smoothly. If you are using eDVD, to install the InterActual Player requires that someone with administrator priveleges does the install, or it won’t work (even if there was a dvd player/decoder on board). Checking this out ahead of time will avoid headaches and frustrated customers in the future.
Jim
-
Julie,
I too don’t use Encore, so I don’t know why or if Encore is placing two chapter markers when you didn’t put any on the timeline. By default, all dvd video streams will have a chapter mark at the beginning. I would be curious as to where eDVD is seeing the second chapter mark. If you click on that mark in eDVD to select it, and click on the arrow to the left of it, eDVD will simulate your dvd title playback from that chapter. It will show you where that chapter is.
As others have posted, you need at least 3 seconds of intervening video to launch a link (and I agree with Pierre that having a bit more than that to be safe is best). What you can do is add 5 or more seconds of just black video at the end of you video and set a chapter mark before the black appears. The viewer shouldn’t see it, and it will give enough time for rom content to launch.
Jim
-
Yep, I’m the same Jim. Glad to be of some help. I thought I would try to get a reply to you here or there.
Jim
-
Pete,
As long as you don’t change the structure of your dvd–ie you don’t change your menus or title sets/chapter marks/and the like, then you should be OK. Try swapping the Video_TS folder you originally created your eDVD project off of with the newly created Video_TS folder (with your wave file substitutions). Just remove or place the original Video_TS folder elsewhere, and place your new one in it’s place. If you reopen the original eDVD project it will run off of the newly replaced Video_TS folder (because it doesn’t know you swapped it out). Build and simulate the project and see if it works like it did before (it should, but it’s a quick way to test it out before sending your disc off for a big run).
Jim
-
There is a potential problem with this, but is probably limited to a very few legacy/older players. Pete, you are tapping into a more hidden option within Procoder for mpeg encoding. Unfortunately the terminology used can be confused with the field order for mpeg output–which is often confused with the field order of the source material.
DV source material is typically LFF (lower field first). It’s imperative that the encoder (in your case Procoder) recognizes the field order of the source file correctly. Generally that is the case, but if you know it is incorrect, Procoder will let you change it. Many encoders shield this ‘choice’ from the user, and you don’t even see that step. Many often confuse the target output of Procoder (where you can set the output for the final file’s field order) with the source or input field order setting. The best setting (and the default for Procoder) is for UFF (upper field first). Some have misinterpreted using that choice (UFF) as being inappropriate since the source file was LFF. They are two different beasts, and without muddying the waters further, UFF for mpeg file OUTPUT is the most compatible.
Now, to confuse issues further, you are even given the option of choosing ‘auto’, ‘field’, or ‘frame’ based picture structure. This has nothing to doing with whether the source file was interlaced or progressive. It has to do with how Procoder ‘packages’ the data. Many commercial dvd’s have field based picture structure, so you shouldn’t have to worry. Unfortunately there are some older players that didnt’ do well with field based picture structure. To top it off, Procoder (up to the first release or so of 1.5) did something with the way it field encoded that it also added to the problem. That has been fixed (as best as I know). What ideally should you choose. “Auto” is theoretically the best–using frame for still shots and the like, and field based for action/motion. You would perhaps get the best looking encodes, but obviously if it causes problems with your authoring system it’s best to use what works, and not ‘split hairs’.
Jim
-
I’ve heard that too, but the fact still remains that there really isn’t anything of substance out there yet on a Mac (or a PC for that matter) for authoring to Blu-Ray recordables. The burners come with some rudimentary options for disc output, which is a nice start, but hardly what we’ve become used to for standard definition disc creation. They should lend themselves well for high capacity optical data storage, but seems to be a pretty expensive way to go for data backup with all the other options out there. The price point (at least for me) is too high for creating data discs and entry level HD dvd’s. I’m still holding out to see what’s around the corner with Apple and Blu-Ray/HD-DVD. Maybe there isn’t anything on the horizon, but that’s hard to believe.
Jim