help please with converting .avi to mpeg-2 (HC encoder?)

[leslie80]

Hello,
My goal here is converting .avi captured from VHS tape to DVD.
I have done editing of .avi's (very small clips) with VirtualDub and am comfortable with that for things like de-interlacing, filters, and resizing.

Here is my setup/specs:

Video captured using digital camcorder passthrough by firewire.
CPU= Athalon 64 3.2 Venice core, 1 gig dual channel ram, 128 meg vid card (uses system ram), raid 0 sata 2 hard drives (video captured on same drive as OS, unfortunately).

Software used (somewhat familiar with): Nero 6.6; dvd decrypter; DivxtoDVD; DVDshrink; WinDV; Gspot


My goal is minimum blockiness, maximum smoothness (vs. sharpness). Speed of the operation is not important.

Here are some questions I have:

1. Now that I am capturing video 30 to 60 minutes long, my capture program (WinDV) is apparently breaking video into 12 minute chunks, is this necessary? I now have to join these together and don't know anything about that, would like to avoid splitting files while capturing unless it's likely to introduce problems.

2. Deinterlacing/resizing/audio volume increase - I know how to do this in VirtualDub but I see there is also the option while encoding for some of this. Can it make a difference in quality (as defined in my goal above) if I do this before encoding?

3. Biggest obstacle right now is how to encode to mpeg-2 for improved quality (vs. mpeg-1). I have HCgui which has great reviews, but (I feel like an idiot) how do I get .avi to it for conversion?? Do I need another step to turn camcorder captured avi's into D2v or avs files?

I know you guys get bombarded with questions and it can get tiresome, but I'd really appreciate any pointers on where to go here. I have read (a lot) but getting overwhelmed here with the mpeg-2 issue especially. I had TMPGenc on this comp. at one time but of course the 30 days expired and I'm only looking for freeware at this point. I know DIVXtoDVD for example is super easy to use but I'd like to do mpeg-2 if at all possible.

I hope I explained myself well, I tried but I am so frazzled right now

***THANKS!!!***
-Leslie

[bobkart]

I capture via Windows Movie Maker 2 and get no splitting of the resulting AVI file. I would think WinDV could be made to capture without splitting.

I use TMPGENc to encode MPEG-2 with great results. Deinterlacing and resizing can be done there too.

I've not run into volume problems with the files I've captured, but if I did I could use one of my many small WAV-file utilities I've written, specifically, the one that can adjust the volume of a WAV file. Of course you don't have those particular utilities, but I'm pretty sure there is something available off-the-shelf that can do such an adjustment.

[leslie80]

I capture via Windows Movie Maker 2 and get no splitting of the resulting AVI file. I would think WinDV could be made to capture without splitting.

I use TMPGENc to encode MPEG-2 with great results. Deinterlacing and resizing can be done there too.

I've not run into volume problems with the files I've captured, but if I did I could use one of my many small WAV-file utilities I've written, specifically, the one that can adjust the volume of a WAV file. Of course you don't have those particular utilities, but I'm pretty sure there is something available off-the-shelf that can do such an adjustment.

thanks bobkart for answering.
Like my post said, trying to encode to mpeg-2 but 30 days expired with tmpgEnc.

Don't want to use anything microsoft unless it was the only way, so no thanks on windows movie maker.

thank you again for your reply.
-Leslie

[bobkart]

There should be a way to use WinDV to capture without splitting. Also, Windows Movie Maker 2 should already be on your system (even WMM1 will do it). I guess I'm not sure how avoiding using something you already have is useful in the "War Against Microsoft".

Also, I doubt you will find anything for free that can do as good of a job as TMPGEnc when it comes to high-quality MPEG encoding. And it's NOT very expensive. If you want to make things harder for yourself by avoiding good, easy ways to do what you're trying to do, that's your business, but it's doubtful that someone will be as motivated to help you "do it the hard way" as they would be to suggest good, easy ways. Certainly I'm not.

[leslie80]

There should be a way to use WinDV to capture without splitting. Also, Windows Movie Maker 2 should already be on your system (even WMM1 will do it). I guess I'm not sure how avoiding using something you already have is useful in the "War Against Microsoft".

Also, I doubt you will find anything for free that can do as good of a job as TMPGEnc when it comes to high-quality MPEG encoding. And it's NOT very expensive. If you want to make things harder for yourself by avoiding good, easy ways to do what you're trying to do, that's your business, but it's doubtful that someone will be as motivated to help you "do it the hard way" as they would be to suggest good, easy ways. Certainly I'm not.

OK first of all winDV does have a way to avoid splitting the files automatically, it just defaults to 12 minute chunks (inexplicably, but hey...keeps people from being bored I guess as they figure out solutions to retarded things).

I will fool with yet another piece of software (tmpgenc) and see if it's easy and intuitive. If so, yes I will buy it. My real-life experience has been that the best software is actually free most of the time, but this may be an exception. As for Microsoft being "good", not in my experience...on occasion easy, yes. The problem with the best software is that someone who can communicate effectively is almost never part of the project...so much so that it evokes visions of nerds giggling while people struggle with their freeware "gifts". Such a waste. Linux should be dominating the world by now, but things like command line fetishes and other inexplicable phenomena prevent this from happening.

[bobkart]

I certainly wasn't calling Microsoft "good". Only that using WMM2 is an easy way to capture DV-AVI, as I'm sure is using WinDV.

You're preaching to choir about Linux etc., I've used Unix and/or Linux throughout my professional career (25 years). Only recently (< 5years) have I resorted to using Windows machines, and it was pretty much out of necessity as a new job required it (the job I still have). We still develop primarily on Linux but in order to be able to conveniently work remotely I got a Windows machine off-the-shelf rather than build a Linux box for home use also. As far as the people at Microsoft intentionally making things hard to use or buggy, I doubt there's any chance of that, it's just that their design philosophy is antithetical to any clean decomposition of functionality, look at the Unix philosophy, make each tool do one thing well, versus the "put every function we can think of in every application we build" attitude that pervades the Microsoft way.

When I started creating DVDs on PC, I used a half dozen different applications to do the MPEG encoding in my quest to get quality results, then was compelled to research the problem when no such results were to be had. TMPGEnc was the result of that research, and I've been happy with it ever since. I don't think "The best software is free" is any more likely to be true all the time than "You get what you pay for" is. Each such "pay-versus-free" situation is likely to be unique and can only be answered by a fair assessment of the options. And it's certainly easy to see how, if someone has spent a great deal of effort in creating a quality product, they may expect some compensation. I believe that is the case with TMPGEnc, and I continue to be satisfied that my recommendations of that product are justified.

[thecoalman]

Video captured using digital camcorder passthrough by firewire.

You should be capturing as DV-AVI. This should be converted to MPEG once, in the interim if you need to create a file that for example you have applied a mask to around the edges you should be using DV-AVI as the output.

1. Now that I am capturing video 30 to 60 minutes long, my capture program (WinDV) is apparently breaking video into 12 minute chunks, is this necessary?

No it is not, the only reason you would need to do this is if your file system on your HDD is FAT32 which only supports a file size of 4GB. What you use to transfer the footage is irrelevant, MovieMaker will work just as well as any other application. It's DV-AVI, the data coming off the cam is copied bit for bit to your computer. It's almost like copying a file.

2. Deinterlacing/resizing/-

Do not deinterlace if the playback is for TV, it is possibly the worse thing you can do. The fuzziness you see on the edges resides in the overscan area, again if it's for playback on a TV you can just leave it there, it won't be visible. If you want to remove it mask it, don't crop and resize. Resizing can be done but you should never scale video up.

[redwudz]

For your WinDV problem, you can set it to make large files. From this guide: http://www.dvd-guides.com/content/view/33/59/

'Set Discontinuity threshold to 0 and Max AVI size to 1000000.'


If you find it changing on it's own, uninstall and reinstall. But I never had that problem.

[leslie80]

I certainly wasn't calling Microsoft "good". Only that using WMM2 is an easy way to capture DV-AVI, as I'm sure is using WinDV.

You're preaching to choir about Linux etc., I've used Unix and/or Linux throughout my professional career (25 years). Only recently (< 5years) have I resorted to using Windows machines, and it was pretty much out of necessity as a new job required it (the job I still have). We still develop primarily on Linux but in order to be able to conveniently work remotely I got a Windows machine off-the-shelf rather than build a Linux box for home use also. As far as the people at Microsoft intentionally making things hard to use or buggy, I doubt there's any chance of that, it's just that their design philosophy is antithetical to any clean decomposition of functionality, look at the Unix philosophy, make each tool do one thing well, versus the "put every function we can think of in every application we build" attitude that pervades the Microsoft way.

When I started creating DVDs on PC, I used a half dozen different applications to do the MPEG encoding in my quest to get quality results, then was compelled to research the problem when no such results were to be had. TMPGEnc was the result of that research, and I've been happy with it ever since. I don't think "The best software is free" is any more likely to be true all the time than "You get what you pay for" is. Each such "pay-versus-free" situation is likely to be unique and can only be answered by a fair assessment of the options. And it's certainly easy to see how, if someone has spent a great deal of effort in creating a quality product, they may expect some compensation. I believe that is the case with TMPGEnc, and I continue to be satisfied that my recommendations of that product are justified.

thanks bobkart,
Some misunderstanding here and there...I wasn't saying Microsoft made things intentionally difficult, I was trying to say that it sometimes appears as if *Linux* and freeware in general comes with intentionally vague help or directions, and that the persons that create the software get their jollies from seeing people struggle with it.
This was said in frustration of course...but maybe in reality there are shades of truth in this? I don't really know.

I hear what you are saying about freeware vs. paid, I was just saying that *my experience* has actually shown that freeware gives better results in most cases. Maybe I've just been lucky, I don't know, but that's been my experience.

I will try tmpgenc if I can stay up long enough tonight, thanks.
-Leslie

[leslie80]

thecoalman,
Thanks, I've since managed to capture without it broken into chunks. I still think this is a ridiculous default option for winDV, a simple warning to fat32 users would have made things a lot less mysterious and time consuming (while leaving the default minimum file size to 1000000 or whatever the max is).

Do not deinterlace if the playback is for TV, it is possibly the worse thing you can do. The fuzziness you see on the edges resides in the overscan area, again if it's for playback on a TV you can just leave it there, it won't be visible. If you want to remove it mask it, don't crop and resize. Resizing can be done but you should never scale video up.

This is interesting and potentially very useful information. I can see interlacing with all of my video captured through camcorder. I can also see the results when I de-interlace it looks much better, at least on computer monitor. Are you saying I still shouldn't de-interlace, if I am making a DVD to be viewed with most televisions (as opposed to computer monitors)?
thanks,
-Leslie

[bobkart]

Yes upon re-reading your earlier post I realized that you were probably referring to the freeware folks rather than MS with the reference to laughing at "us users". But had already commited to my post so I left it as it was.

Good luck with your quest for free ways to do what you're trying to do. Not counting the volume adjustment (for which I have my own applications), I have done it numerous times, and very straightforwardly, with no problems at all, just like this:

1) Capture DV-AVI with WMM2
2) Encode DVD-Compliant MPEG-2 with TMPGEnc
3) Author VIDEO_TS with TDA
4) Burn to disc with Nero (although TDA will do this part too)

Of course I can't claim that this is "the best" way to do it, but it's a good, easy way that works for me and many others. And with TMPGEnc in the process, the quality of the results are better than all of the other MPEG encoders I have tried (about a half dozen).

[leslie80]

...with TMPGEnc in the process, the quality of the results are better than all of the other MPEG encoders I have tried (about a half dozen).

I checked on TMPGEnc. $100 is way too much for just an encoder imo...if it had very good & easy-to-use authoring I might consider. Doesn't seem like current users get much of a break on upgrading either.
thanks anyway for your suggestions.
-Leslie

[thecoalman]

I can see interlacing with all of my video captured through camcorder. I can also see the results when I de-interlace it looks much better, at least on computer monitor. Are you saying I still shouldn't de-interlace, if I am making a DVD to be viewed with most televisions (as opposed to computer monitors)?
thanks,
-Leslie

Yes. if you deinterlace you are effectively throwing away half the resolution, additionally the playback may appear choppy. Do two test burns preferably with some fast motion and compare them on a TV, do not rely on your monitor. For computer playback use a player like PowerDVD which deinterlaces on the fly.

FYI, DV is bottom field first. You'll be given that choice in the encoder.

I checked on TMPGEnc. $100 is way too much for just an encoder imo...

I'm not familair with Tmpgenc but it's listed here as $37 for the standalone encoder, you are probably looking at one of the other products.
http://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/product/tp.html

BTW all of the mainstream encoders are more than $100. You may want to consider getting a authoring or editing package like Ulead Movie Factory which includes an encoder.

[leslie80]

Yes. if you deinterlace you are effectively throwing away half the resolution, additionally the playback may appear choppy. Do two test burns preferably with some fast motion and compare them on a TV, do not rely on your monitor. For computer playback use a player like PowerDVD which deinterlaces on the fly.

FYI, DV is bottom field first. You'll be given that choice in the encoder.

OK as I understand it I should never deinterlace, but I still need to know "bottom field first" when encoding.
thanks coalman,
-Leslie