Question Fit to disc bitrates

I have Nero Platinum suite 2023 and am using Nero Video to create a Bluray disc.
When I bring in my Mp4 it will not fit and I must select Fit To Disc.
I have two different versions of the Mp4 file, one is at a bitrate of 22 and the other is at a bitrate of 36.
I have tried bringing both in separately and they both end up with a bitrate of 32 with the same file size.
Again, this is after selecting Fit To disc.
The question: is there no difference in quality between the two files I end up with, or is there a difference in quality between the Mp4 brought in at 22 and brought up to 32 and the Mp4 brought in at 36 and brought down to 32 ?
If there is a difference, which option is better (in terms of playability or how it looks)?

 

In my opinion, you should use the 36 bit video. Increasing the quality of the 22 bit video may result in unwanted artifacts.

What I can't find (because I've been away from this so long) is certain disc format options such as High Quality, Standard Play, etc. which were used in the case where a project was too large for the disc. Using those allowed using a larger files than that would normally fit on a disc but at the expense of quality. I think the options provided where you selected Automatic fit to disc do the same thing.

 

You can't improve a lower 22 bitrate video by transcoding it to a higher 32bitrate, because the result is only as good as the original content. So as Wither suggested, your best option is to go with the higher 32 bitrate source for the best possible outcome.

 

The higher bitrate Mp4 is at 36 and would be reduced to 32, lowering it.
That being said, the original camera footage is only about 12 bitrate.
When I exported it from my video editor I made 2 versions, one bumped up to 22 and the other at 36.
If only I knew which one I should use...

Final destination will be a Bluray disc, dual layer, project currently will not fit on a dual layer.

 

Even still you would be better off going with the higher bitrate because it will have suffered less loss than the 22 during the original transcode.

 

Not sure I understand, the 22 version started at 12 originally and went up to 22 (about 10) whereas the other version went from 12 to 36 (about 24).

 

When you transcode a video it takes a loss even if the result is at a higher bitrate. The difference here is that a 36 bitrate container will retain more of the original content than a 22 bitrate container. The best case scenario is that it's not a visual loss either way. Why not try both and then look to see if you can tell the difference? Even though the original started out as 12 bit, when you transcoded it to 22 and 32 bit there will still be some loss.

 

Well that's the question, won't there be more loss with the second 36 bit file since its bitrate changed the most?

 

No! A 36 bitrate file can hold more information so it will remove less from the source than the 22 bitrate file.

 

Thanks, will return with results

 

The latest versions of Nero use AI in some cases for upscaling. However, if the original video is satisfactory and fits on the disc, I would skip using either of the two later ones. If they won't fit naturally, you will have to take a cut in the quality to get them on the disc. I assume you're using DL (50 GB) and that's selected in Nero Video.

 

The original camera footage is at 12 bitrate. It was edited with lots of shake reduction done, some lighting and color changes, and music added.
I exported to h264 in Mp4 container increasing the bitrate to accomodate the added effects.
Yes its set for 50 on the project.
I will be saving to my cp as ISO file and then burning to disc, at which time I could then Fit to Disc if I make the ISO in matching quality and it comes out too big.

 

Why would you use ISO? That's not a video format. You would burn it to your hard drive as a Nero Image File which then can be burned in Burning Rom or Nero Express. Fit to disc is going to change the project as necessary which would mean a change of quality.

I clarified the use of the image file in a later post.

 

Sorry, actually I select Write To Hard Disc Folder.
I thought this created an ISO ??

 

Converting an Mp4 to an ISO is useless and serves no purpose. A DVD or BD on the other hand can be saved as an ISO with its structure in tact and that is useful. An ISO facilitates 1 click burning of multiple copies on almost any burning software. It can also be easily mounted from a storage hard drive collection for quick and convenient playback and it will function just like a disc.

 

So I take it Save To Hard Drive will not make an ISO ?
Is a Disc Image an ISO ?

 

When you use the Burn To in the Burn screen, you can opt to burn an Image File. That is a Nero file. That way you can burn your project to disc anytime you wish in either Burning Rom or Nero Express and, if you already selected Fit to Disc when you created your project, you don't have to go through that process again. If you select Write to Hard Disk Folder in the Burn screen, it will save your Project as, in the blue ray, a BDMV folder which is the structure that would be on a the disc. The settings made in the project will also be retained. You can also burn that in Burning Rom or Nero Express.

A disc image can be a ISO but, as Sophocles mentioned, it serves no purpose for what you're doing.

 

When you burn an Mp4 you're burning it as a data file, so converting it to ISO adds nothing of value and could make it a hassle to play because you'll have to mount it before you can use it. If you're converting the Mp4 to a DVD or BDR compliant format and then saving it as an ISO for later burning, then that's fine because it will be compatible with almost any burning software.

I'm beginning to wonder what your purpose is here. You keep essentially asking the same question over and over again phrased a little differently.

 

My desire is to save to hard drive, then load this in the burning Rom and burn the disc.
To that end am I better off saving the project as a BDMV or saving it as an Image file?