Need Advice for higher quality in SVCD

[puar]

I finally figured out how to capture my video at 704x480 without losing frames (and all this time I thought my hardware couldn't handle it).

Anyway, what I've noticed, is that I actually don't see that much/if any improvement from my original 352x240 capture after converting it to MPEG2 using TMPEnc. It seems what I'm lacking is the sharpness or crispness I thought I would get with a higher resolution capture.

I'm capturing in VirtualDub at 720x480, and then converting it in TMPEnc to SVCD using it's SVCD (NTSC) template.

I'm sure there are tweaks to make it look a bit better, so any suggestions would be great.

[Z]

Try using changing the Fields thats the most comman thing to make it looks SOFT AS,, some capture drivers have the A and B Fields arround the wrong way

[Panash]

No, A-B field order problems manifest themselves temporaly, ie as shimmering or block motion noise, rather than spacially, ie picture softness, look elsewhere.

If you are interested in experimenting with A-B field order, you can do. TMPGenc allows control of A-B field order in the advanced settings. You can also try frameserving with AVISynth and using the script keyword "swapfields", but I suspect this will really screw things up, which will demonstrate that the field order is correct. You will have four combinations,

1)normal, empty AVISynth script, A-field dominant in TMPGenc
2)empty AVISynth script, B-dominant in TMPGenc,
3)swapfield in AVISynth, A-dominant in TMPGenc
4)swapfields in AVISynth, B-dominant in TMPGenc

I'm intereseted in other folk's findings on this one.

After all, MPEG2 isn't supposed to give an improvement in resolution, it gives support for interlacing, which gives smoother pictures. The higher (variable) bitrate gives the picture improvement (more coefficients in the DCT and less JPEG mosquito noise)

PN

[stanwebber]

what is your target resolution? my natural assumption is 480x480, but 352x240 sounds more consistant with the problems you are having. i'll make another assumption that you are capturing vhs....and well at 352x240 picture detail is practically non-existant