WMV vs. MPEG compression artifacts?

[smexxy]

Hi. Here is my situation. I have 2 copies of a video in both WMV and MPEG. The WMV file is 210 MB while the MPEG is 300MB.
Technically speaking, should they both be equally transparent? Does the bigger size of the MPEG file create a perceptible difference in the quality of the video?

[filmboss80]

You tell us -- how does the wmv copy of the video look compared to the MPEG copy?

When you say MPEG -- do you mean MPEG-1 or -2? WMV's compression scheme should give you a much better quality image for the disk space than MPEG-1.

So, what do you want to do with the video in question? Do you want to only watch it on your computer or do you want to do something else with it?

[Cornucopia]

Since WMV is a flavor of MPG4, and "MPG" could be MPG1, MPG2, or even MPG4 (though usually 4 isn't labelled that way), it's hard to tell.

But normally, "MPG" turns out to be MPG1. WMV is much more compression efficient than MPG1, so if I were doing it from the same master, it would be either ~2-3x better quality for the same size or 1/2 to 1/3 the size for the same quality. But without knowing all the source choices, pre-processing, and compression settings and procedures, who knows.

Use MediaInfo to peek into the specs of the videos. That'll help to better compare. Ultimately, the eye (and brain) is the determiner.

Scott

[poisondeathray]

There is not enough information, too much guesswork, too many variables to say for sure.

Is the assumption that they were taken directly from the same source? One might have been from a blu-ray and one might have been from a DVD for example. Were any of them pre-processed or filtered before encoding? Some MPEG2 encoders commonly use a lowpass filter by default.

Also, "WMV" can be VC-1 (higher quality) or WMV3 (lower quality) or even WMV1 or 2 (much lower quality)

Also, the "flavor" of encoder can make a huge difference. A "MPEG2" video encoded by a 1pass Super will look horrible compared to a 2pass HCenc or CCE , for example.

The settings used can make a big difference. Were high quality settings used or lower quality settings?

Cornucopia is right - at the end of the day, the only thing that matter is how it looks. No number or bitrate can tell you that.

[smexxy]

So, what do you want to do with the video in question? Do you want to only watch it on your computer or do you want to do something else with it?

Which format would be best for burning onto a dvd, and does burning the video onto a dvd provide any improvement in video/audio quality? (assuming the display is constant whether the dvd is played-back on pc or dvdplayer)

[Cornucopia]

Burning HOW?

A. As a DVD-Data disc, you burn what you already have (a WMV and a MPG). The quality is the same as it already is. Of course, you couldn't normally play this on a settop player...

B. As a DVD-Video disc, you must convert the WMV to DVD-compliant MPEG2+AC3/MP2/PCM. The MPG file may ALREADY be compliant, or may not, hard to say. You still haven't given us any more info about the internal specs...

Assuming BOTH must be converted, the LOSS in quality would probably be similar in both, so then you are again left with comparing their relative existing merits.

Scott