Mpeg 2 vs .avi

[kpt101]

Hi all,

Is it true that rendering to .avi is uncompressed video and Mpeg2 is compressed?

If it is then when would be the best time to render to .avi and when to use Mpeg 2? I've tried to render both ways and my final product is output to Dvds using Dvd Architech 2, both seem to look the same to me.

Thx for your respond.

[David Jimerson]

Digital Video is compressed whatever you do. AVIs are much less compressed thatn MPEGs, though.

You'll end up the same either way for DVD, it's true. However, if you render out as MPEG-2 for DVD Architect FROM Vegas, DVD-A won't have to re-render the video every time you make a change to the DVD menu screens, etc.. You'll have a much easier time with your DVD authoring.

Otherwise, DVD-A will have rerender the ENTIRE video every time you want to make a change.

[Barry_Green]

AVI is a file format, not a compression method. AVI's can be uncompressed, or DV compression, or Cinepak, or Sorensen, or many other types of compression. Typically nowadays we use DV compression in AVI files, especially when editing.

MPEG-2 files are both a compression format and a file format.

[David Jimerson]

That's quite true, Barry, but looking at it from the point of view of rendering out from Vegas, someone who isn't familiar with all the various compression schemes is most likely going to pick the DV AVI template, which is what I assume is in play here. I was commenting from that perspective . . .

Though correct me if I'm wrong, Keith.

[kpt101]

Thanks for your responses David and Barry.

You 're right David, based on what I know then, I did rendered a home video with .avi and then went to Dvd A and it had to re rendered again. I just thought that was the best way to go. Now I know better. :)

Again, thanks to both your help.

Keith