ConvertXtoDVD Problem

[natty]

Hi I don’t know if anyone here can help me but I am using the above program to convert this .mpg movie to vob files such as as VIDEO_TS and AUDIO_TS to watch on a home DVD player but after its converted the quality is bad it was very sharp before, but now after its blotchy a bit like mosaic effect every so often. can someone suggest a fast program like ConvertXToDVD to make those same files VIDEO_TS and AUDIO_TS

[Baldrick]

Please give more information about your source mpg. Resolution/frame size, runtime, etc.

[marioval]

Check the setting on the "Encoding" page. Choose the "Auto" option, it will give the best possible output based on your input file. If your still not getting the results you want, try the freeware avstodvd or dvdflick, they probably won't be as quick but will give good results.

[natty]

sorry here is a gspot snap

[Baldrick]

It looks it's dvd compliant so need for reconversion. Author the mpg to a dvd -video with gui for dvd author(or dvd flick, be sure to choose to not reconvert when you import though) and burn on a dual layer DVDR with imgburn. Or author it, output on the HDD and then shrink the VIDEO_TS folder with dvdrebuilder or dvd shrink so it fits on a standard dvdr.

[OldMan64]

Yes, as Baldrick says. The file is too big for a single layer DVD (because of the high bitrate) and that might be why the result from ConvertXtoDVD looked different, as it was shunk to fit,maybe.

[natty]

It looks it's dvd compliant so need for reconversion. Author the mpg to a dvd -video with gui for dvd author(or dvd flick, be sure to choose to not reconvert when you import though) and burn on a dual layer DVDR with imgburn. Or author it, output on the HDD and then shrink the VIDEO_TS folder with dvdrebuilder or dvd shrink so it fits on a standard dvdr.

Will dvdflick make the movie into a VIDEO_TS folder ready for dvdshrink then

[Bulldog57]

yes it will make the movie into VIDEO_TS and AUDIO_TS folder ready for dvdshrink

[natty]

ok thanks, but why is dvdflick so slow at converting slower than ConvertXToDVD isnt dvdflick the same then what ConvertXtoDVD does

[ulapines]

If you are using v4 of ConvertXtoDVD try HQ in encoding options and tick 2 pass encoding

[natty]

If you are using v4 of ConvertXtoDVD try HQ in encoding options and tick 2 pass encoding

Where is HQ then in encoding options I can see where it says 2 pass encoding

what difference will this make to movie then

[ulapines]

It tries to adapt the bitrate to fill the whole disk >4 GB
Like this


[Attachment 415 - Click to enlarge]

[natty]

It tries to adapt the bitrate to fill the whole disk >4 GB
Like this


[Attachment 415 - Click to enlarge]

cant click on the attachment as it says this

Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator

[ulapines]

New try



[Attachment 417 - Click to enlarge]

[ulapines]

Another try, if it doesnt work I give up


[Attachment 418 - Click to enlarge]

[ulapines]

OK new rty

[marioval]

Keep in mind that with Convertxtodvd, when you choose the encoding option, you are not telling convertxtodvd what to do with the output, you are telling it what you have for input. You do not choose "HQ" because you want High Quality output. That would be silly, why would anyone not choose that option LOL..... In other words if you choose "HQ High Quality up to 80 min" and you source file is 180 minutes then you will get worse results than if you choose LQ Low Quality. You best move is to choose "auto" and let the app check your source file duration, it will choose the best encoding profile for you.

[ulapines]

So you mean a low bitrate with LQ Low Quality gives better quality than a bitrate with HQ that fills up your DVD5 disk space?

[marioval]

What I mean is if you have a source that is very long in time duration, you cannot expect to get good results so you would tell convertxtodvd to do a low quality encode and it will do a variable bitrate offering higher bitrate to the areas that need it (dark scened with lots of motion) and will offer less bitrate to the scenes that do not need it (well lit low or no motion)..... If you have a short duration source file, you can expect high quality results, so you tell convertx to do a high quality encode and it will do a constant bitrate encode offering the same bitrate to the entire video. The important thing to remember is to choose the encoding profile based on the source OR just use "auto" and this will all be chosen for you with the best choice. Don't worry about wether nor not the entire 4.7GB disk is filled, padding the bitrate to fill the disk just makes a bigger file that takes longer to encode, it is not giving you better quality.

[lordsmurf]

Why are you reconverting it again? Just author it.
The source is PAL, too.

[ulapines]

My experience from ConvertXtoDVD is that if you choose low quality with a given duration of the movie you get a project size appr. half
the size of same movie in high quality encoding. So one movie with 1hour 30 min duration in low quality encoding was appr. 2 GB in size
whereas same movie in High quality was appr. 4 GB
I also noticed that the movie with the bigger size looked better on my TV.

[guns1inger]

Personally, I think that VSO screwed the pooch with ConvertXtoDVD4. The changes they have made to the quality settings are at best unintuitive, and at worst, completely worthless. And regardless of the setting chosen, encodes are now consistently undersized. The same 2 hour 10 minute movie encoded using high quality mode in CXD3 fills a disc to 98%, while CXD4 produces 2.78GB using high quality, medium quality or auto. Two-pass encoding doesn't do anything to improve the space utilisation, or produce better quality than the single pass CXD3 encoding. In short, if you have CXD3 and are happy with it, don't upgrade to CXD4 until they get it working correctly. Very disappointing.

[ulapines]

Found this on VSO forum:
The common mistake is to believe that BIGGER SIZE / BITRATE will produce bigger quality. THIS IS NOT TRUE IN ANY CASE.
Link:http://forums.vso-software.fr/how-to-get-best-quality-max-of-files-doesn-t-fill-dvd-t11326.html

[guns1inger]

No, bigger is not always better, but squeezing 140 minutes into 2.7GB will not produce good quality either. The encodes from CXD3 that fill the disc are also demonstrably higher quality than the undersized encodes from CXD4.

I have been using CXD since the DivxtoDVD days, so I understand how the product works, and VSO's arguments/rationalizations. I still think CXD3 is a good product for what it does, and the only one-click-wonder worth paying for. But my comparison testing between CXD3 and CXD4 so far lead me to state that I believe CXD4 to be a regressive step for the product line.

[Noahtuck]

Why are you reconverting it again? Just author it.
The source is PAL, too.

Yeah i was wondering that before i came to your post!!

Reconvert it then transcode it

JUST AUTHOR IT!!!!
With an authoring program, then if you have to shrink it a tad then use dvdshrink or better yet DVDRebuilder.

You are just degrading it more by converting it more than you need to.