DV BITRATE VS DATA RATE...

Hi -- I've a question about DV's bitrate (25Mbps) and data rate (3.6MBps).
(1) What is the relationship between one another?
(2) Does FCP decompress DV's 25Mbps bitrate and recompress when printing to tape?
(3) What of outputting to MPEG2 DVD? Say at 7Mbps bitrate -- does FCP recompress when outputting to this destination type?
(4) What is the BEST way to capture, edit and output (to DVD) for FCP5.1.2 where visual quality is concerned?
Thanks

1. they are the exact same ... DV has a fixed data rate of 25 megabits per second. 1 byte = 8 bits, so the 25Mbps may sometimes be approximated to 3.6MBps
2. yes and no. FCP's DV codec (compressor,decompressor) is used to display the footage to your canvas, however, unless you otherwise affect the footage then it is only the raw original data that is printed to tape.
3. yes ... if the ouptput is a different codec than that of the original then it must be transcoded, hence decompressed using the original codec and recompressed using the target codec
4. capture using the highest possible quality your system can handle (preferably uncompressed), edit natively in that same codec, output for dvd using the highest bitrate MPEG2 your compression/ dvd burning sofware can handle

Similar Messages

H.264 All-Intra Data Rates Significantly Higher

Does the built-in H.264 codec encode I-frame only files differently? I am trying to determine the optimal GOP length for high bitrate exports. Image quality seems to degrade, even in the I-frames, when using key frame distances greater than one.
After performing a series of tests to characterize the Adobe H.264 encoder, I discovered that exported files are significantly larger when key frame distance equals one frame (N=1). The average video data rate for a test file rendered with the Adobe H.264 encoder is as follows:
N=1 : 2.17 bpp : 24I
N=2 : 0.66 bpp : 12I + 12P
N=3 : 0.59 bpp : 8I + 8B + 8P
Note how the data rate drops 70% (from 2.17 to 0.66 bpp) even though 50% of the I-frames still exist when N=2. By comparison, here is the video data rate when exporting with QuickTime H.264:
N=1 : 0.89 bpp : 24I
N=2 : 0.70 bpp : 12I + 12P
N=3 : 0.64 bpp : 8I + 16P
The following chart shows data rates at key frame distances from 1-48 frames for Adobe H.264, QuickTime H.264 (via Adobe), QuickTime Pro, and Expression Encoder 4 Pro. Data rates are consistent among all encoders at GOP lengths greater than one. There is an anomoly with the Adobe H.264 codec compressing all-intra files.
The observed behavior occurs in all profiles, which were tested at Levels 4.1, 4.2, 5.0, and 5.1:
Image quality is better in the Adobe H.264 all-intraframe file, especially with respect to detail retention. The pictures below show sections of two consecutive frames magnified 400%. The file with N=2 is less accurate and contains noticeable blocking. Even the I-frames don't look as good in the files where N>1.
The test file was a seventeen second Premiere Pro sequence consisting of H.264, MPEG-2, and AE files with effects applied. Exports were rendered from the Premiere Pro timeline and from a V210 uncompressed 4:2:2 intermediate file of the sequence. The following settings were used:
Format: H.264
Width: 1280
Height: 720
Frame Rate: 24 fps
Field Order: Progressive
Aspect: Square Pixels (1.0)
TV Standard: NTSC
Profile: Baseline, Main, and High
Levels: 4.1, 4.2, 5.0, 5.1
Render at Maximum Bit Depth: Enabled
Bitrate Encoding: VBR, 2-Pass
Target Bitrate: Maximized for each Profile/Level
Maximum Bitrate: Maximized for each Profile/Level
Key Frame Distance: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 24, 48
Use Maximum Render Quality: Enabled
Multiplexer: MP4
Stream Capability: Standard
Software:
Adobe Media Encoder CS6 Creative Cloud v6.0.3.1 (64-bit)
Premiere Pro CS6 Creative Cloud v6.0.3
Windows 7 SP1
QuickTime Pro for Windows v7.6.9 (1680.9)
MediaInfo 0.7.62 (for GOP and data rate information)

I think the short answer is yes,
a h.264 encoder does I-frame only differently. I frames are complete expressions of a picture with no temporal compression information.
P frames use _P_redictive information. IE information from prior frames.
B frames use _B_i-directional predictive frame information.
h.264 gets the majority of it's bit saving from use of B and P frames. When you do I-frame only you only get the block compression and none of the advantages of P and B frames. Thus the GOP N=1 doesn't get very good bit's per pixel.
Having said all that I do find your comment...
Profitic wrote:
Note how the data rate drops 70% (from 2.17 to 0.66 bpp) even though 50% of the I-frames still exist when N=2. By comparison, here is the video data rate when exporting with QuickTime H.264:
... very interesting. Indeed, why is the datarate 70% less when it should at best be 50% for GOP N=2. 50% less should be the same I-frame information plus 0 bytes for the B frame between them. (GOP = I,B,I). Any more than that and it is throwing away bits from the I-frame. So, this seems to be to be a ratecontrol bug.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_of_pictures
"The GOP structure is often referred by two numbers, for example, M=3, N=12. The first number tells the distance between two anchor frames (I or P): it is the GOP size. The second one tells the distance between two full images (I-frames): it is the GOP length. For the example M=3, N=12, the GOP structure is IBBPBBPBBPBBI. Instead of the M parameter the maximal count of B-frames between two consecutive anchor frames can be used."

Video (or Video + Audio) Data Rate

Wondered if anyone here might know of a software utility that has the ability to scan QuickTime compatible files and either display the video (or video + audio) data rate excursion or, as an alternative, graph the instantaneous variation in the data rate over time.

Apple +I (show info) in QT player will show you the framerate and bitrate while playing.
Thanks for your suggestion, Rick. However, I must point out that the data rate so displayed is simply the total average for the entire clip and not the instantaneous (i.e., constantly changing) variance with time. Preliminary observations tend to indicate the single pass H.264 algorithm begings roughly 10% under the requested data rate and quickly settles very near the target. The multipass algorithm, on the other hand, appears to begin in the vicinity of 300% above the targeed data rate and monotonically decreases throughout the remainder of the movie clip. So much for a quick qualitative analysis based on observations during the actualy encoding process.
What I now wish to do is actually perform a bit of quantitative analysis and, based on those results, correlate actual data rates with the ability of a given H.264 multipass file to sync to an iPod. Basically, I am trying to determine whether or not a user data rate input is used as a comparator during the initial phase of multipass H.264 coding and, if so, how it is implemented. (I.e., how are the delta values handled -- linearly, exponentially, etc.) In addition, I wish to compare QT v7.0.3 with v7.0.4 clips to determine why the latter are less iPod compatible. Too, there remains a question as to whether or not any data rate information is now embedded in the clips themselves since various work arounds tried (i.e., clipping file lengths) have proven unsuccessful.

PGC...data rate too high

Hallo,
message
nunew33, "Mpeg not valid error message" #4, 31 Jan 2006 3:29 pm describes a certain error message. The user had problems with an imported MPEG movie.
Now I receive the same message, but the MPEG that is causing the problem is created by Encore DVD itself!?
I am working with the german version, but here is a rough translation of the message:
"PGC 'Weitere Bilder' has an error at 00:36:42:07.
The data rate of this file is too high for DVD. You must replace the file with one of a lower data rate. - PGC Info: Name = Weitere Bilder, Ref = SApgc, Time = 00:36:42:07"
My test project has two menus and a slide show with approx. 25 slides and blending as transition. The menus are ok, I verified that before.
First I thought it was a problem with the audio I use in the slide show. Because I am still in the state of learning how to use the application, I use some test data. The audio tracks are MP3s. I learned already that it is better to convert the MP3s to WAV files with certain properties.
I did that, but still the DVD generation was not successful.
Then I deleted all slides from the slide show but the first. Now the generation worked!? As far as a single slide (an image file) can not have a bitrate per second, and there was no sound any more, and as far as the error message appears AFTER the slide shows are generated, while Encore DVD is importing video and audio just before the burning process, I think that the MPEG that is showing the slide show is the problem.
But this MPEG is created by Encore DVD itself. Can Encore DVD create Data that is not compliant to the DVD specs?
The last two days I had to find out the cause for a "general error". Eventually I found out that image names must not be too long. Now there is something else, and I still have to just waste time for finding solutions for apparent bugs in Encore DVD. Why doesn't the project check find and tell me such problems? Problem is that the errors appear at the end of the generation process, so I always have to wait for - in my case - approx. 30 minutes.
If the project check would have told me before that there are files with file names that are too long, I wouldn't have had to search or this for two days.
Now I get this PGC error (what is PGC by the way?), and still have no clue, cause again the project check didn't mention anything.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Christian Kirchhoff

Hallo,
thanks, Ruud and Jeff, for your comments.
The images are all scans of ancient paintings. And they are all rather dark. They are not "optimized", meaning they are JPGs right now (RGB), and they are bigger then the resolution for PAL 3:4 would require. I just found out that if I choose "None" as scaling, there is no error, and the generation of the DVD is much, much faster.
A DVD with a slide show containing two slides and a 4 second transition takes about 3 minutes to generate when the scaling is set to something other than "None". Without scaling it takes approx. 14 seconds. The resulting movies size is the same (5,35 MB).
I wonder why the time differs so much. Obviously the images have to be scaled to the target size. But it seems that the images are not scaled only once, that those scaled versions of the source images are cached, and those cached versions are used to generate then blend effect, but for every frame the source images seem to be scaled again.
So I presume that the scaling - unfortunately - has an effect on the resulting movie, too, and thus influences the success of the process of DVD generation.
basic situation:
good image > 4 secs blend > bad image => error
variations:
other blend times don't cause an error:
good image > 2 secs blend > bad image => success
good image > 8 secs blend > bad image => success
other transitions cause an error, too:
good image > 4 secs fade to black > bad image => error
good image > 4 secs page turn > bad image => error
changing the image order prevents the error:
bad image > 4 secs blend > good image => success
changing the format of the bad image to TIFF doesn't prevent the error.
changing colors/brightness of the bad image: a drastic change prevents the error. I adjusted the histogram and made everything much lighter.
Just a gamma correction with values between 1.2 and 2.0 didn't help.
changing the image size prevents the error. I decreased the size. The resulting image was still bigger than the monitor area, thus it still had to be scaled a bit by Encore DVD, but with this smaller version the error didn't occur. The original image is approx. 2000 px x 1400 px. Decreasing the size by 50% helped. Less scaling (I tried 90%, 80%, 70% and 60%, too) didn't help.
using a slightly blurred version (gaussian blur, 2 px, in Photoshop CS) of the bad image prevents the error.
My guess is that the error depends on rather subtle image properties. The blur doesn't change the images average brightness, the balance of colors or the size of the image, but still the error was gone afterwards.
The problem is that I will work with slide shows that contain more images than two. It would be too time consuming to try to generate the DVD over and over again, look at which slide an error occurs, change that slide, and then generate again. Even the testing I am doing right now already "ate" a couple of days of my working time.
Only thing I can do is to use a two image slide show and test image couple after image couple. If n is the number of images, I will spend (n - 1) times 3 minutes (which is the average time to create a two slides slide how with a blend). But of course I will try to prepare the images and make them as big as the monitor resolution, so Encore DVD doesn't have to scale the images any more. That'll make the whole generation process much shorter.
If I use JPGs or TIFFs, the pixel aspect ratio is not preserved when the image is imported. I scaled one of the images in Photoshop, using a modified menu file that was installed with Encore DVD, because it already has the correct size for PAL, the pixel aspect ratio and the guides for the save areas. I saved the image as TIFF and as PSD and imported both into Encore DVD. The TIFF is rendered with a 1:1 pixel aspect ratio and NOT with the D1/DV PAL aspect ration that is stored in the TIFF. Thus the image gets narrowed and isn't displayed the way I wanted it any more. Only the PSD looks correct. But I think I saw this already in another thread...
I cannot really understand why the MPEG encoding engine would produce bit rates that are illegal and that are not accepted afterwards, when Encore DVD is putting together all the stuff. Why is the MPEG encoding engine itself not throwing an error during the encoding process? This would save the developer so much time. Instead they have to wait until the end, thinking everything went right, and find out then that there was a problem.
Still, if sometime somebody finds out more about the whole matter I would be glad about further explanations.
Best regards,
Christian

The data rate of this file is too high encore

Hi,
Im new to all this, and I need a real quick solution as this needs to be done for the next few days, please help.
I get a "the data rate of this file is too high encore"the data rate of this file is too high for DVD" message when I try to brun to disk.`
I assume this means the bitrate I used when exporting from premiere? I only have one file to go on the DVD, what bitrate should I use?
Thanks

What did you export from Premiere?
Did you use the MPEG2-DVD preset... and did you make any changes to the preset?
CS5-thru-CC PPro/Encore tutorial list http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1448923 may help

Another PGC Data Rate Error

Hi,
Like a few others out there, I've been having a "PGC Data rate too high, please switch with lower data rate" problem for a few weeks now. I've been searching online for the past week and a half for a solution and have tried everything suggested, from changing the transcoding max bitrates (down to 5.0) and lowering the audio bitrate, to recompressing, and reencoding the said video file that is having problems. I removed this certain video from my project and built it without any problems which leads me to believe that this one video is the culprit. No matter what I've tried, I still get the same message although the time of error varies by a second or two. Is there any other help someone may be able to offer about the subject? Thanks.
Leighton

Leighton.
This sounds like a somewhat esoteric way to do the conversions IMHO.
It is possible the total combined data rates do exceed - but in EncoreDVD 2 this is a warning more than anything else.
I got these when running HIgh Bitrate MPEG-2 CBR encoded files along with PCM audio - I ignored the warning & built the disc anyway. It worked just fine.
Bitrates in question were 8,000 for video & 1536 for Audio.
Within specs. The little yellow triangle triangle with an exclamation mark was clearly visible in the timeline, so I used the "Ignore warnings & build anyway" option as I knew it was "in-spec".
Can you please let us know some details about the project:
1 - Source of files
2 - Bitrates encoded
3 - Audio type
etc.
I wonder - and hopefully someone can confirm one way or the other - if Encore sets the limit for this warning from the setting made in preferences about the maximum bitrate?

ITunes data rate?

Before buying music from the iTunes store I'd like to get an idea of what quality to expect. My wife and I are audiophiles and music lovers and are somwhat particular about quality. We've discovered that when encoding CD's to MP3 we generally have to encode at 192 kbps or higher to get decent quality without too many artifacts, expecially with complex music such as orchestration or with lots of bright sounds like cymbals. (we've tried several different CODEC's). Some people here have said that AAC/.m4a produces better quality for a given data rate than MP3, but most of the serious objective tests I've seen indicate that any difference is either trivial or nonexistent.
So what is the bitrate for music on the iTunes store?
Thanks in advance.
iPon Nano Windows XP Pro

At present the bit rate for iTMS tracks is 128 KBPS
Yuck!
One other thing to keep in mind is that the iTS store sells songs encoded at 128 kbps with the AAC codec which Apple claims is equivalent to a 160 kbps mp3-encoded file.
I'm not trying to sell you anything here because in the end it's going to be your ears that will decide whether the audio quality is acceptable or not but you could buy one or two tracks to see hear what you think. If you're happy with the quality, you can proceed to buy more. If not, you can write the whole thing off as a fairly inexpensive learning experience.
And if you're interested in a more technical comparison of the AAC and MP3 formats, have a look at this article .

Data rate when creating Quicktime h.264: difference between download and streaming ?

I've got a question on data rate setting when creating a quicktime movie with h.264 codec:
In the Compression settings dialog I can restrict the data rate to a certain value (e.g. in my case I use 20.000 kbit/s for creating a HD1080i movie).
There is an additional drop box "Optimized for" where I can select between "download", "streaming" and some other value.
Is anybody aware of the exact meaning of these settings ? My impression is, that using "download" I set the average bit-rate, allowing much higher bit-rates in peaks, while "streaming" sets a maximum bit-rate. Is that correct ? or are any other parameters affected by this setting ?
I now discovered, that the output file when using "streaming" with restriction of 20.000 kbit/s leads to a file with average bitrate of only approx 17.000 kbit/s (while it's more or less exactly 20.000 when using the "download" setting). Does that mean, that the overall quality of my output file would be worse ? or would only peak rates be affected (e.g. scenes with a lot of movement) and the overall quality remains the same ?
Happy to learn if anyone has any experiences / best practices on this topic.

Restrict isn't, it seems, a hard limit. When I specify 18Mbps it seems to run up to 21Mbps. But, that's fine since it's certainly isn't excessive and if I really cared I could set it at 15Mbps.
I suspect it might be more accurate with 2-pass. Also, i never ever use the Apple codec. i use x264 which allows more encoding tools. And, even it is not a super good H.264 encoder.
Using rates under 2400Mbps is IMHO asking for the near impossible for good quality SD video.

Max Data Rate: AGP 2x?!

Bought myself a new MSI-KT6 Delta a few weeks ago (MSI-6590), and have had no problems until now.
First up, my GeForce 4 Ti 4600 decided to suddenly die. Random characters on the screen in text mode, flickery colours and corrupt pixels everywhere. Windows wouldn't detect it properly anymore.
Bought a new Powercolor Radeon 9600 XT with VIVO today. Downloaded the new drivers, and loaded up some Battlefield, all good. Runs nice and smooth. COD, Quake 3, etc, no problems at all.
Halo, however... BAD. Even with the basic graphics settings and no Pixel-Shading, it runs at 4 frames a second, and nothing I do changes this, from lowest to highest with Pixel-Shaders 2.0. Although there's a visual difference, it's just as slow.
So I loaded up ATI control Panel and used SmartGart to enable 8x and Fast-Writes... Rebooted, lots of flickering screen, and Windows XP is now software-rendering everything (Transparent menus take 100% CPU to fade in)
Wait for SmartGart to fix my graphics again, and it's all back to 4x and no fast-write.
Loaded up SiSoft Sandra, to check the settings in there...
Mainboard: "Max Data Rate: AGP 2x"
AGP Card: "Data Transfer Modes Support: 1x, 2x"
"AGP Bus is unused or AGP card not fully AGP compatible"
Er... should this be right? BIOS wont let me select an AGP speed, it's "Auto" and I can't select it. I'm a little concerned that my Motherboard may have been damaged! I'll go get the latest Halo Patch, but it doesn't change the fact that I can't use 8x or Fast-Write.
I'm a little apprehensive about flashing my BIOS, made more difficult by the fact that I have no working floppy drive.
CPU: AMD 2600+
RAM: 2x512mb DDR 333MHz Kingston
AlphaGremlin

Well, I updated the VIA drivers, and an updated Sandra. AGP is running at 8x, and Fast-Writes are enabled! I don't know what the hell SmartGart was going on about, but it appears to slunk away and disappeared completely from the ATI control panel since the last reinstall of drivers.
So there's one problem solved... but I don't know what's up with Halo... I can set it to the lowest settings and it still runs like an elephant with three legs, even with the -useff option for Fixed Function shaders... ah well, that's a matter for another forum, eh?
Interesting note: Sandra reports my 120gb drive as 605gb... should I be trusting it?
AlphaGremlin

Data rate supported by 6533

Hello,
Can someone tell me what is the data rate supported by PCI 6533. i mean transfer the data from peripheral to the hard disk of the PC.

Hi,
Here are a couple Knowledge Bases that address this performance specification. I just posted the knowledge bases today so they might take a day or so before they are live. Hope that helps. Have a good day.
What Are The Performance Benchmarks For The High-Speed I/O - NI 653x
http://digital.ni.com/public.nsf/websearch/4FCA248D888831C386256D8900563E45?OpenDocument
PCI-6534 pattern input while streaming to disk benchmarks
http://digital.ni.com/public.nsf/websearch/E93C4BA24B0DEC0B86256BC8006AEA0A?OpenDocument
Ron
Applications Engineer
National Instruments

How to achieve high usb data rate with cRIO-9022?

Hi all,
I read the datasheet of NI-9022 and know that USB data rate can be 480Mb/s.
I want to transfer data with rate 3.6MB/s which is much slower than the spec, but the result is time out error.
I check my FPGA and RT code by save to RT disk and the result is pass. So I think my code should be correct.
Is that because the USB driver not installed into RT?
Should I install the USB driver into RT?
Or is there any other issue I haven't find?
Thanks a lot.

According to this document: Data Storage Options for CompactRIO, depending on many conditions, such as complexity of processor
requirements, USB data can be transferred off the controller at
approximately 700 KB/s.
Also, you don't need a driver to get a USB mass storage device to work on the cRIO. Have a look at this document:
Utilizing Features of the USB Port on My cRIO-901x or My cFP-22xx Controller
Not sure if these issues are causing timeout errors. What happens when you transfer data at lower speeds? Do you get timeout errors then?
Adnan Zafar
Certified LabVIEW Architect
Coleman Technologies

I have a question about Data Rates.

Hello All.
This is a bit of a noob question I'm sure. I don't think I really understand Data Rates and how it applies to Motion... therefore I'm not even sure what kind of questions to ask. I've been reading up online and thought I would ask some questions here. Thanks to all in advance.
I've never really worried about Data Rates until now. I am creating an Apple Motion piece with about 15 different video clips in it. And 1/2 of them have alpha channels.
What exactly is Data Rate? Is it the rate in which video clip data is read (in bits/second) from the Disc and placed into my screen? In Motion- is the Data Rate for video only? What if the clip has audio? If a HDD is simply a plastic disc with a dye read by "1" laser... how come my computer can pull "2" files off the disc at the same time? Is that what data transfer is all about? Is that were RAM comes into play?
I have crunched my clips as much as I can. They are short clips (10-15seconds each). I've compressed them with the Animation codec to preserve the Alpha channel and sized them proportionally smaller (320x240). This dropped their data rate significantly. I've also taken out any audio that was associated with them.
Is data rate what is slowing my system down?
The data rates are all under 2MBs. Some are as low as 230Kbs. They were MUCH higher. However, my animation still plays VERY slowly.
I'm running a 3GigRam Powerbook Pro 2.33GHz.
I store all my media on a 1TB GRaid Firewire 800 drive. However for portability I'm using a USB 2 smartdisk external drive. I think the speed is 5200rpm.
I'm guessing this all plays into the speed at which motion can function.
If I total my data rate transfer I get somewhere in the vicinity of 11MBs/second. Is that what motion needs for it to play smoothly a 11MBs/second data connection? USB 2.0 is like what 480Mbs/second. So there is no way it's going to play quickly. What if I played it from my hard drive? What is the data rate of my internal HDD?
I guess my overall question is.
#1. Is my thinking correct on all of these topics? Do my bits, bytes and megs make sense. Is my thought process correct?
#2. Barring getting a new machine or buying new hardware. What can I do to speed up this workflow? Working with 15 different video clips is bogging Motion down and becoming frustrating to work with. Even if only 3-4 of the clips are up at a time it bogs things down. Especially if I throw on a glow effect or something.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
-Fraky

Data rate DOES make a difference, but I'd say your real problem has more to do with the fact that you're working on a Powerbook. Motion's real time capabilities derive from the capability of the video card. Not the processor. Some cards do better than others, but laptops are not even recommended for running Motion.
To improve your workflow on a laptop will be limited, but there are a few things that you can try.
Make sure that thumbnails and previews are turned off.
Make sure that you are operating in Draft Mode.
Lower the display resolution to half, or quarter.
Don't expect to be getting real time playback. Treat it more like After Effects.
Compressing your clips into smaller Animations does help because it lowers the data rate, but you're still dealing with the animation codec which is a high data rate codec. Unfortunately, it sounds necessary in your case because you're dealing with alpha channels.
The data rate comes into play with your setup trying to play through your USB drive. USB drives are never recommended for editing or Motion work. Their throughput is not consistent enough for video work. a small FW drive would be better, though your real problem as I said is the Powerbook.
If you must work on the powerbook, then don't expect real-time playback. Instead, build your animation, step through it, and do RAM previews to view sections in real time.
I hope this helps.
Andy

What is the Data Rate of the Cache in Adobe Premiere CS6

Hi,
Trying to build a raid array to edit with and want to know how much speed i need for caching read/write drive for premiere and After Effects. I'm of the impression that the cache doesn't need more than a single 7200rpm drive (~120MB/s) but really i have no clue what the data rate that adobe caches to is or what the data rate to read is
so it's 2 questions
how fast does premiere write the cache? (i know this is system dependent but a ballpark figure would be good for say a sandy bridge i5 2500k system with a 2 raid 7200rpm drive)
and
what's the data rate to read the cache in a 1080 24p file?
also, when doing the final export does premiere/after effects read from the Cache or the original files or both?
thx,
Jayson
youtube.com/AWDEfilms

ok i've figured out the physics of this question.
The Cache Read data rate is always larger than the Cache Write data rate, because the computer would have to be rendering to Cache faster than realtime for the Write rate to be higher, which would make it unnecessary to render to cache in the 1st place. So I'm really only worried about the Cache read data rate. Does adobe have a paper that tells us what the data rate is for different sequences.
my 3 common workflows are
canon h.264 1080 24p
AVChd 1080 24p from my GH2 with a 44mb
and
r3d 5k epic footage 24p - (this is painful to edit )
anyone know where this info is?
thx,
Jayson
youtube.com/AWDEfilms

How do you fix error message "data rate for this file is too high for DVD. You must replace this file with one of a lower data rate".

When trying to burn a DVD it will go through the encoding step and at 98% we see the message 'data rate for this file is too high for DVD. You must replace this file with one of a lower data rate". We need help to correct this so we can complete burning to DVD.

What did you export from Premiere?
Did you use the MPEG2-DVD preset... and did you make any changes to the preset?
CS5-thru-CC PPro/Encore tutorial list http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1448923 may help

In Aperture 3.4 Export Slideshow to a video, what are the actual Data Rates used for "Best", "High", ... "Least" quality for a given resolution?

My Photo website host (SmugMug) converts uploaded video files at a specific Data Rate in Mbps before installing them. I would like to compress my slideshow video file to the same rate before I upload it to reduce file size and upload time. When I choose the "Custom" setting for an Export, I can choose 1 of the 5 Quality choices and see the estimated file size. But, I cannot know what the actual Data Rate is until after I wait a long time to export the slideshow (hours for a long slideshow) and then examine the resulting file in QuickTime Player's Inspector.

I ran a few tests using a short slideshow (16 images, 1:23 mins/secs) at 1,728 x 1,080 resolution to find out the bit rates for various quality level choices.
Export setting              Quality          Resulting bit rate          File Size
HD 1080p                    default                20.68 Mbps              214.8 MBytes
Custom                       Best                   20.49                       212.8
Custom                       High                     6.25                         65.0
Custom                       Medium                3.97                         41.3
However, I don't know if those bit rates will be the same for different length slideshows or for different output resolutions. My SmugMug host site uses an 8.0 Mbps rate for a 1728 x 1080 video file. If I choose Custom/Best, my file will be almost 3 times bigger and much higher quality than necessary, but if I choose Custom/High, my file will be smaller and lower quality than SmugMug's converted version.
I have installed MPEG StreamClip that will let me convert an exported Aperture slideshow video file, and StreamClip allows me to choose a specific bit rate in Mbps. But, I would prefer not having to do a 2 step process (Export from Aperture, then convert in StreamClip).

DV BITRATE VS DATA RATE...

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for