hi all,
i am new here. trying to edit personal videos.
i have a miniDV cam 800,000 pixel. but when i get the video files into
computer,
it looks like the AVI file has less than 500,000 pixel. Am using firewire.

any idea why?

thank you.

In message , Dr. Jai
Maharaj writes
hi all,
i am new here. trying to edit personal videos.
i have a miniDV cam 800,000 pixel. but when i get the video files into
computer,
it looks like the AVI file has less than 500,000 pixel. Am using firewire.

It might help if we knew what video editor you are using.
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info

In message , loz
writes
Because that is the DV standard. It stores a 720x576 image = approx
420k.

Ummm... Don't you have more than one bit per pixel, Loz?
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info

"Tony Morgan" wrote in message
...
In message , loz
writes
Because that is the DV standard. It stores a 720x576 image = approx
420k.

Ummm... Don't you have more than one bit per pixel, Loz?

Is that me personally? As in "one bit short of a pixel" :-)
Or are you talking about the way CCDs are measured?
e.g. does an "800k CCD" really mean an 800k image?
Normally specs tend to talk in terms of resultant image size don't they, as in
the still image saved would be 800k pixels (regardless of what the sensor size
is)

loz

In message , loz
writes

"Tony Morgan" wrote in message
...
In message , loz
writes
Because that is the DV standard. It stores a 720x576 image = approx
420k.

Ummm... Don't you have more than one bit per pixel, Loz?

Is that me personally? As in "one bit short of a pixel" :-)
Or are you talking about the way CCDs are measured?
e.g. does an "800k CCD" really mean an 800k image?
Normally specs tend to talk in terms of resultant image size don't they, as in
the still image saved would be 800k pixels (regardless of what the sensor size
is)

AFAIK (no doubt someone will correct me if I'm wrong) the CCD size has
nothing to do with the filesize. The camcorder's signal processor simply
converts whatever the CCD produces into 720x576 pixels to be piped down
the firewire. Then of course each pixel comprises 16 bits, so ISTM your
calculations are a little awry.

--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info

"Spam Magnet" wrote in message
...
But you don't poke 4:1:1 720x576 down the 1394, you poke DV, so talking
pixels is a bit pointless here.

DV standard is
720 pixels per line
625 lines for PAL
Though cameras dont usually resolve that many lines.
The resolution of DV is consistently referred to as 720x576pixels is it not?

And talking pixels is quite relevant here as
1. the OP asked about pixels
2. camera manufacturers insist on using pixels as a measure - hence the OP's
original reference to his 800k pixel camera

Loz

"Neil Tungate" wrote in message
.co.uk...
In article , loz wrote:

DV standard is
720 pixels per line
625 lines for PAL

Those are "samples", not "pixels".

what is the difference between a sample and a pixel?

You are saying the standard is 720x576 "samples"
And I earlier said it was 720x576 "pixels".

And the vertical number is 576 for
PAL standard signals.

I know, that's what I said.
625 lines for PAL is also correct, that is what is sampled to get the 576
pixel/samples

And the samples are not square.

Nor are the pixels.

Loz

"loz" wrote in message
...

"Malcolm Knight" wrote in message
...
"loz" wrote in message
...

"Neil Tungate" wrote in message
.co.uk...

And the vertical number is 576 for
PAL standard signals.

I know, that's what I said.
625 lines for PAL is also correct, that is what is sampled to get
the
576
pixel/samples

Why would anyone (CCIR 601) want to sample the part of the frame
that
has no image content?

search me.
But PAL is 625 lines regardless of whether any are redundant or not.

How many of those lines camcorders actually choose to sample no doubt
varies
from camera to camera.

CCIR 601 the standard which all the common digital video formats follow
is 720x576 in PAL. AIUI the margins of the 'old standard' picture are
lost for ever. ie. not sampled.
--
Malcolm

"Malcolm Knight" wrote in message
...
"loz" wrote in message
...

"Malcolm Knight" wrote in message
...
"loz" wrote in message
...

"Neil Tungate" wrote in message
.co.uk...

And the vertical number is 576 for
PAL standard signals.

I know, that's what I said.
625 lines for PAL is also correct, that is what is sampled to get
the
576
pixel/samples

Why would anyone (CCIR 601) want to sample the part of the frame
that
has no image content?

search me.
But PAL is 625 lines regardless of whether any are redundant or not.

How many of those lines camcorders actually choose to sample no doubt
varies
from camera to camera.

CCIR 601 the standard which all the common digital video formats follow
is 720x576 in PAL. AIUI the margins of the 'old standard' picture are
lost for ever. ie. not sampled.

OK, having read a bit further I know understand 625 line PAL actually has 576
"active" lines. And that is what gets sampled..
Apologies if me earlier comments were incorrect re scanning of all 625 lines to
produce the 576 samples/pixels.

Loz

"loz" wrote in message
...

"Malcolm Knight" wrote in message
...
"loz" wrote in message
...

But PAL is 625 lines regardless of whether any are redundant or
not.

How many of those lines camcorders actually choose to sample no
doubt
varies
from camera to camera.

CCIR 601 the standard which all the common digital video formats
follow
is 720x576 in PAL. AIUI the margins of the 'old standard' picture
are
lost for ever. ie. not sampled.

OK, having read a bit further I know understand 625 line PAL actually
has 576
"active" lines. And that is what gets sampled..
Apologies if me earlier comments were incorrect re scanning of all 625
lines to
produce the 576 samples/pixels.

Ok, you can be the expert now; it's a long time since I read the book.
:-))
That's why I took care to pose questions rather than be too dogmatic and
possibly be mistaken for a Welshman . ;-)

IIRC we used to speak of 768x625 lines so by old standards quite a large
chunk gets chucked away before the 5:1 DV compression kicks in.
--
Malcolm