"120 Mins + Video On 1 CDR - The Prove It Campaign"

[bilbogod]

Ok this is a competition of sorts !!!!! This post is to end the persistant speculation and rumour surrounding encodes of 120 minutes or more on 1 c.d. The challenge is for anyone who wishes to take part to provide an exhaustive run-down of their chosen methods. Full credit will go to those who can offer the most satisfying results. This post is not intended as a platform of ridicule, but as a fair means to provide satisfactory methods and appropriate criticisms once and for all.
Is anyone game ????? Then let the battle commence

p.s. If any of the experienced Mods wish to modify the rules to make this contest appropriate then please do this....

[KoalaBear]

Sean, nobody cares.

120 minutes per disc is a realistic target for DVD, but not [S]VCD. No matter how you slice it, the average bitrate is too low to reproduce even a VCD-sized image acceptably.

While I think the cabal of members out to ridicule you is as lame as, well, some of the claims that you make, it doesn't make sense to me to provoke that ridicule by using a pseudonym to establish a "contest" that cannot be won because the premise is ultimately meaningless.

If I were you, I'd give it up. It's just not that important, and your enemies have far more in the way of facts than your "friends." It's a game only a loser would play, and believe me, there are those who would do so simply for the purpose of taunting you.

If Baldrick says it's okay for moderators to bash members, I can't change that, but at least I can defend my point of view if it happens to be in the minority. You can't.

Why bother to even try?

[bilbogod]

Whoaaa!!! I'm not sean!!! Check out the history of my posts.... Sean lives in the U.S.A I live in the U.K.... ask d4n13l if you don't believe me, we are virtually next door neighbours in internet terms...
p.s. I haven't taken any offence !!! and I understand why you might have thought that I am. In an earlier post I stated that I was tired of unsubstantiated idle posts, this is a way for all those people to give method to what we think is madness. Please folks continue as necessary...

[bilbogod]

p.s. no offence to sean but his grammatical use of English is hardly comparable with mine

[KoalaBear]

No offense to you, Mr. Bilbogod, but your own English surely isn't one of your bragging points, is it? :)

Whether you're Sean or not isn't really an issue. Sean has so many pseudonyms it's difficult to tell who he is from day to day, so it doesn't really matter if you're someone else in this case -- the objective is to set Mr. Madison up for another round of derision, which if you're him I would advise you to avoid, and if you're not, I find wholly offensive.

There are so many other interesting and worthwhile topics to discuss. Why waste your time on a thread like this?

[shochan]

By reading his post I gather that this isn't a bitchfest, but a sharing of ideas between the folks that do prefer to put 120min on one cd. I dont do it myself but I will give it a shot. How long of a clip is needed to do this. I would add that if one was to do this they should encode the whole 120min and then cut accordingly. How long should the slice be?

[bilbogod]

Koalabear - The whole point of this exercise was to end once and for all the type of crap that you are sick of reading. How many posts have you read offering unsubstantiated claims without any evidence. If you think that me writing this is simply fuel for idiotic discussion then so be it. But I'd rather be an enlightened idiot than an ignorant one. If anyone continues to make spurious claims at least I can refer them to this thread where they can effectively put there "money where there mouth is".
On a final point, contrary to popular belief, there are those out there who use the "longplay" function on there video player and hence would benefit from information concerning issues of longevity, rather than just quality. If anyone is interested in sharing there ideas then this will be entering into the sprit of things, please lets not burn everyone at the stake who tries !!

Shochan - I guess this can be the best methods of your choice to produce a vcd/svcd of 120 mins+ on 1 cdr

[SatStorm]

120 min in one 80min CDR is possible.
The quality sucks overall, but it is possible....
And when I say "sucks" I mean it is like EP VHS... Still acceptable for some people
I remind you my guide http://www.vcdhelp.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=78643 for the amazing "SVD". Totaly -X- but playable on enough DVD players...
My first thought was to name it Crap Video Disc, but then CVD is used by Chaoji VCD...
Did anyone try it? I don't think so. And I know why: Because I didn't post words like: NO BLOCKS, DVD Like quality, etc...
People are stupid. That's why marketing exist. If I repost the same "guide" in a couple of months with more catchy words, I know that people shall make that method a hit..

About Sean, he is a 14 year old kid. I remember myself on his age. So, I don't give a Rap for the way he acts. Give him a couple of years to grow...

[cybermage26]

Hey Bilbo,

http://www.vcdhelp.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=78480
try out my method, its substantial with quality, its pretty decent, I was impressed with the results. I did try out Satstorms ideas but I found it to be sub-par of my own template.

There was a sample and everything for proof, its no lie, I feel my own method is the best way to fit lots of video on to one cdr that I have tried to date.

Give it a go bilbo and tell me how you go. I too was becoming sick of reading posts such as the ones you refer too. If you would like another sample I would be more than happy than to provide you with one

Get back to me.

[SatStorm]

@ cybermage26
Your method is very good for progressive source, like DiVX
My Crap SVD is very good for DVB/DVD Interlace source!

Different source, different results

[Tommy]

I can put 120 minutes on a cdr, it'll look like crap but i can do it....... 8)

[TechJosh]

Somebody please correct me if I am wrong because I am making some assumptions here... but doesnt Black & White compress better than color? I know that in RGB you've got 256^3 possible colors and that MPEG does impliment averageing and such to reduce the size of the stream, but with B&W I think you only have like 256 possible shades. If B&W compresses into MPEG as well as color you could fit three times as much per disk in B&W than you could in color.

Once again this is only based on assumptions and obviously you dont usually want to take color out of a movie to fit it on one cd, but it would work for putting older B&W shows onto cd. Why doesnt someone try it and confirm/deny my assumptions?

[d4n13l]

I have seen many similar claims of 120mins+ of good quality video on one CDR made by people other than sean, whether some of them were just his oppos or not, I cannot say for sure. But the odds (probably ) say that that at least some of them arent anything to do with sean.
Besides, it would be interesting to see how many people do take the challenge. All bilbogod is doing, is asking people who make these claims to *prove* what they are saying and to show their method - I have the notion that myths should be examined, as I am sure do other people here. Hopefully, posters in this thread will avoid the tendancy to use argumentum ad hominem and concentrate on the issue in hand. I would like to see the facts stated, without the rhetoric.

PS
I can catagorically state that bilbogod® is not in any way affiliated with sean madison.

[Antonio S.]

Look at my templates and guides for (S)VCD in 1cd posted in my site and judge for yourself...

Antonio S.
http://www.antonio.owns.it

[bilbogod]

Ok I'll be off for the next couple of days to enjoy a quick bout of rest and recreation. From when I last looked there have been a few extra methods added including this one that I just found in another thread:-
http://www.vcdhelp.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=79011
What we really need is for someone to make an impartial and fair judgement on the various submissions. I'm not sure that I'm the best person to do this + it is going to take a bit of time to wade through the various methods. Still this lot should keep me going for a bit.
p.s. the winner can sleep with Britney....
p.p.s. Britney is my next door neighbours dog.

[bilbogod]

Cybermage26 - Well what can I say. Nice one dude!!! I haven't had time to check any others yet but you seem to have delivered the goods. I must admit I was quite surprised by it. You can just hear the strangulated screams of your critics in the background

[GwenA]

Antonio S.
I didn't try your SVCD 1cd template but I did try your SVCD template and it looks great! I just encoded The One and with all the action scenes there was no blur or blocks. Now I can get my movies with SVCD on 2 cds instead of three. Just wanted to say Thanks.

[vitualis]

I agree with the sentiments of bilbogod and d4n13l.

If you can make a template that can fit 2 hours of video onto one 80 min disc reliably and have it looking generally as good as standard VCD (i.e., average bitrate ~ 66% of standard VCD) then please post it and prove it.

I don't think it is possible, but I would like to be surprised.

Regards.

[homerpez]

Um... Mike "virtualis"... I never thought I'd hear you say something like this!

OK. I suspect I will be asked to provide some sort of sample of "What does that look like" video on this one...

I have put the movie "Unbreakable" on one 80-minute SVCD.

That's Svcd as in 480x480 resolution. Not VCD. S-V-C-D.

1 hour, 46 minutes. The result was 50-100% sharper than a typical VCD, actually I saw very little difference from the DVD, while standing only 3-4 feet from my TV.

I used CCE (I can't believe there are schmucks still using TMPGEnc) multi-pass endocing, and a VERY VERY low AVG bitrate was used. Did 128k audio.

Making this all the more astounding, this is technically speaking, a COMPLIANT SVCD! The only problem would be if I tried to do chapters on it, as SVCD only supports timecodes up to 99 minutes.

Now, as for this "1 CD = 120 minutes" being a MYTH... NO, IT IS NOT.

But... it definitely depends on the movie.

In my example, it's widescreen, so no motion search or data changes for almost half the screen. It also is reduced to the original 23.976 framerate, so less frames are being encoded total (pulldown applied). It's also not an action movie, so VBR encoding allowed for more bits allocated to the 1 or 2 scenes with intense motion.

I dare say for a sci-fi action flick, say, "Fifth Element", this would not works quite as well.

In closing, 120 minutes = acceptable-quality 80 min. disk DOES EXIST, but it depends on the movie.

Thank you, and have a nice day, all.

[d4n13l]

Quality is subjective, not objective: You may be happy with what you did, other people would say it looked like crap.
The only movie that I have been able to fit onto one CDR with what I deem to be acceptable quality, is South Park (all 80 minutes of it ). We could sit here and argue the toss all day, but it would be rather pointless.

In closing, 120 minutes = acceptable-quality 80 min. disk DOES EXIST, but it depends on the movie.

No, it depends on who whoever views the movie.


PS
You really shouldnt sit so close to the TV screen.

[cybermage26]

Cybermage26 - Well what can I say. Nice one dude!!! I haven't had time to check any others yet but you seem to have delivered the goods. I must admit I was quite surprised by it. You can just hear the strangulated screams of your critics in the background

Thanks dude, hurray, hopefully I get to sleep with your next door neighbours dog! wooohoo hehe.

Actually I was extremely impressed with my own template (head grows) and I though it would of gotten alot of positive feedback, but I think i didnt because everyone was sick of reading posts about fitting heaps of video onto a single CD-R that never proved it.

Ohwell, such is life. I'll still be using my template, please tell me how you go with SatStorms template also, would be interested to know, he had good ideas but also didnt get the attention deserved. I would hope that Baldrick would maybe post my templates in the VCDtools section, but as of yet havent emailed him asking..

Thanks bilbo .

[ktnwin]

THERE IS NO NEED TO PROVE IT.
IT'S VERY DOABLE

QUALITY REALLY SUCKS.

[homerpez]

...youre right, it really is subjective...

I personally am taken aback when I see such things as... well... even the slightest MPEG artifact sends me almost ballistic!

Be that as it may, there's an understanding here that isn't subjective.

It is fact, that nobody here on this forum has ever made a VCD or SVCD without ANY artifacts, or ANY blocks. They ALL have them, whatever the bitrate.

Why?

Because they are VCD's and SVCD's. They aren't DVD's, they're never going to look like DVD's, no exceptions.

I grade on a curve. I don't look at them on a computer monitor, I look on an Analog TV (with interlace lines). You'd be amazed what it hides.

I also sit way WAY back to view them (like 10 feet), but often on movies if I see no visible artifacts at 3-4 feet distance I'm happy.

But VCD is still VCD...

Yes, 120 minutes on one CD is crap. But I also have 120 on two or three CD's, and it STILL is on some movies.

If someone's just looking for the best way to go, I can only say CCE! CCE! CCE! MULTI-PASS! CCE!

[vitualis]

@ homerpez: I know that you can fit 120 min for "some" films but my criteria is...

If you can make a template that can fit 2 hours of video onto one 80 min disc reliably

That is, fit 2 hours on a disc for every movie and have it looking at least as good as standard VCD.

As I stated, that means getting VCD quality video at about 66% of the standard VCD bitrate... I reckon it is NOT possible (to do it reliably), but if someone can surprise me, please do.

Regards.

[ultrabrutal]

Well since most players play 90 min cd-r with no problems (at least those I've tried), I think you can get a 120 min movie on a 90/99 min cd-r using MPEG1 352x240/288 VBR. I do not remember if CCE does mpeg1 vbr. I do believe that TMPGENC does...

Try comparing CCE/TMPEGENC VBR with a standard VCD CBR. I think you will find that quality is just as good if not better. Of couse not all players does MPEG1 VBR...

MPEG2 rules. Use a DVD-R and you will have no problems putting 120 min on it in any quality you like

[videoguy79]

I am *really* doubtful that one can obtain pleasing results from putting 120 minutes of video on 1 80 minute CD-R, let alone having every movie meet the same high-quality specifications.

My reasoning behind why I think that this is impossible starts with entropy. I'll first use audio as my example since I am better aquainted with the theory behind it than video. If you take a 44.1Khz, 16bit uncompressed PCM file, you can remove some information and still have the the abilty to generate an exact bitstream upon decoding. This is lossless compression, such as Monkey's audio, LPAC (Huffman encoding or Zip for other kinds of data). One can sometimes get compression rates of 2:1 using such methods, even higher for some types of material. This is accomplished by removing padding ("junk chunks", i.e. zeros) from the stream. It does, however, depend on the material. Classical music compresses to 3:1 (usually), since there is less information in the bitstream that cannot be recovered upon decompression. (Rock & Roll can be losslessy compressed only to about 55-60%.) There is a point at which the data cannot be compressed any more without loss--this is known as entropy. As I have said earlier, this varies with the type of data being compressed. Audio is very complex and cannot be compressed losslessly at rates of 4:1, for example, wheras other types of datafiles can be compressed at higher rates, depending on redundency. That is why Zip files can be different sizes even if the source files were the same size to begin with.
MPEG, being lossy compression, throws out what it deems as being spectrally "unecessary" components of the stream, thereby generating a higher compression level. Once again, there is a point at which even MPEG, if given enough bits, could be lossless (for audio, this point is not offered as an encoding option, but would be between 700-900Kbps). The further and further one gets from this point, the more data is thrown away and the quality will decrease; this is caused by not having enough data to (faithfully) reconstruct the stream. At video bitrates of under 1150Kbps, I just don't see how there would be enough data to reconstruct decent-looking (objectivly--VCD) video. I personally feel that 1150kbps is not even adequate for most movies! No matter what settings one plays with in Tmpgenc, the codec itself does not change. The MPEG standard is only capable of doing so much--one cannot get transperant CD-Quality audio at 32Kbps, or studio-quality video at 600kbps. It probably will never happen because even if compression keeps on getting better, there is a point at which it is not physically possible to reconstruct enough data to reproduce certain components, due to the fact that you don't have enough bits to represent every level you need (for example, 16-bit PCM audio has over 32,000 levels per sample). For example, a 32kbps mp3 doesn't even have enough available bits to cover all the levels necessary to get a faithful reproduction of a single instrument! So, if you are happy with the quality that a 600kbps stream gives you, go ahead and cram as much video on a VCD as you can. Some movies will compress better than others, depending on thier content. But to say that such video will be as good or even (God forbid) better than a standard VCD is akin to thinking that if you just play around with the settings on your 8-track tape player you can get CD-Quality audio, or by messing around with the settings on a VCR you can get DVD quality video. Like MPEG, these archaic technologies are limited and can only do so much.

[bbb]

A good quality movie on 1 cdr is possible. But, you gotta use divx smr and wait till next year when divx4/mpeg4 standalones come out and get hacked. So you can watch these cdrs on tv (without an annoying computer fan on).

For now, the popular standard on this site, VCD, is not even close to being acceptable. In fact, VCD's have been ridiculed by every Video magazine and the alt.video.desktop newsgroup for years. This is why video enthusiasts, dedicated home theatre nuts, and the average joe have not made vcds popular in the U.S. It has and always shall remain a hobbyist/school kid format in the U.S. because VCD is oxymoronic with quality.

2 years ago, I tried to prove the experts wrong by encoding (with multiple multiple settings) vcd clips with the Panasonic encoder. The result of my The Matrix dvd encodings into vcd was not bad, but still blurry and not even close to dvd quality. Hence, I stopped my efforts. Furthermore, I purchased and watched authentic legal vcds which still have unacceptably low res/blurriness.

Fortunately, since then, SVCD (480x480 and 352x480-a variant of SVCD) was developed and realized in many consumer players. SVCD was what renewed my interest and efforts in video encoding to cdr this past year. My movies (352x480 with VBR) take 2-3 cdrs. But, they look at least as good as a store bought VHS movie in color richness and cleaness. Also, sharpness is much better than VHS--like laserdisc quality.

Since upgrading to a faster system a few months ago, I have tried the various VCD templates on this site to objectively test the hoopla. But, alas, none of the templates at standard VCD resolution and at VCD bitrate or less, show any significant improvement in quality (video clarity and consistency) over what I saw two years ago in my own encodings and on legal vcds. They may look good in a small window on one's big computer monitor, but blow them up or play them on a dvd player and VCDs looks ugoleee and blurry.

I suspect, that the excitement of putting video on cdr to be played back on TV (and the fact that most lack the CPU power or patience to make SVCDs) has caused some excitable cheap noobies to exclaim "eureeekaaaa! I copied dvd onto a cdr ... and it looks grrreeeaat ... I must be god ... bow down to me and I will hand down to thee my devine template."

Either that or these individuals have aging eyes, near sightedness, cataracts, or are almost legally blind for them to preposteriously exclaim such silly notions that they can fit a 2 hour movie on 1 cdr when it takes companies in asia 2 vcds which isn't even good enough to be considered VHS quality.

and so this debate ends ... surely

[videoguy79]

bbb-

I couldn't agree with you more! And if I may add one more thing to the mix, I will mention that mpeg-4 works on different principles than mpeg-1 or mpeg-2, so its possible that mpeg-4 will "look" better at the same low bitrate as a 600kbps mpeg-1 stream. I have seen DivX (not my favorite format, btw) encodes done at 600kbps that looked a hell of a lot better than the same 600kbps encode in mpeg-1. I've been doing VCD's for 2-3 years, longer than many noobies (though I didn't register w/ VCD.com until recently). I spent night after night ******* with Tmpgenc settings, to see how much video I could cram on a VCD since my lazy ass didn't want to get up halfway through to change discs. You know what? As I became more and more experienced, I couldn't give a rat's arse whether or not my video fit on 1 CD. I dveloped a taste for quality! Now: 2-3 CD XSVCD rips, using multipass VBR at bitrates of up to 4500kbps. When they see it cannot be done, the argument will be moot unitl another group of "video freshman" comes along and make the same claims. However, given that DVD-R is getting cheaper, I am not sure that ripping movies onto CD's will even be an issue in a few years. I know myself that my first DVD burner will be purchased this summer when I have some $$$--I'll never have to make another (S)VCD again!!

[vhelp]

bbb,

this is not a debate, but my experience and observations. . .

hay, a VCD can look sharp too U no! Not as sharp as a
DVD, he, he.... but, definately look VHS** or better!!
I don't know how you'v encoded your VCD's (back in the
past) but I can tell you this much, I've improved my
methods, and now, even with my "captures" as well, and
encoded to VCD, they look pretty good, but NOT SVCD
quality, or DVD either, but on some of the capture and
encodes that I have done (even some today) you'd sware
if you walked away ta get a cup of coffee and came back
while the VCD was playing, you'd think you were watching
satalete!! At least, for me, that seeems to fool me at
times, he, he... No kidding!

** or close to VHS, and "sharpness" being close to my
satalete signal on some tv programs.

I dont agree with watching a VCD on a PC monitor. I just
don't get it, why anyone would, but some do. I don't!!
I play ONLY on my TV.

I've sinse changed my ideas about VCD, from negative, to
now positive. ie, I like the idea of storing a whole
1 hours worth of capture TV program ie, Star Trek E, and
burning it on ONE cd, instead of TWOOOO!! As long as I
perfect the quality (pending on the quality of the tv
show) i'll use my new method to create a good VHS quality
VCD of the tv show. At least IMO, the VCDs I've ben
screwing around with have proven me to be close to VHS
or VHS or even, BETTER than VHS quality (from my captures
that is) ...not from DVD sources. granted, there will
be those tough ones, encodes tha tis, that just wont be
come VHS quality. ie, most outdoor video shots are bad
quality and show blocks easy, but indoor lighitng type
videos encoded to VCD come out great if your method is
the bomb!

I agree with your "eureeekaaaa" statement. I too was
one of them in my early days. Not anymore.

As far as comparing VHS to VCD (which is the better in
quality) I think its not a fair assessment. Why? cause
after about 2 or 3 plays, the VHS start to show signs of
deteriation. In one of my experiences with a store
bought movie, I found lines in some scenes that I did
watch a few times (4 or more times) and so...
But, I'm at a loss why you don't think that VCD compare
to VHS. I think they do to some extent. Each has it's
flows, hence my discussionof the lines in VHS, and not
to mention the blocks in some scenes in a VCD. So, they
both have tradeoff's. I don't know. What do i know!

since you've D/L'd my clips in the past, take a look at
this clip I just did! Tell me what you think about the
quality. It's not a beefed up or pumped up bitrated
VCD, rather close to standard if not... - you gave me a
good skinny review of my xSVCD in another post, he, he...
NOTE: if you have the Apex AD-1500, color is nice and rich.
I also played it on my AD-500, but color is lighter, not
as rich as the AD-1500, but still looks good. So, in theory,
your dvd player may be to blaime when it comes to judging
quality of YOUR encoded VCD or SVCD's. Slwmo was good
too. Let me know if ya C'zzz any blocks, he, he... K dude???

<< VCD >>

-vhelp

[vitualis]

@ bbb:

I agree with most of your comments but VCDs have to be taken in the world historical context, not in a US-centric view.

You say that the quality of VCD does not "even come close to being acceptable", but I believe that you are applying too harsh a criteria. Although VCD and VHS have their differences, the overall video quality is quite similar and VCD definitely has better audio quality than VHS. VCD obviously looks nowhere as good as DVD or Laserdisc, but shouldn't really be compared to them either as it was not designed to be a competitor to them.

You have to remember that the VCD standard came out about a decade ago and became popular mainly in Asia instead of VHS. In a real way, VCD was a competitor to VHS in those markets.

VCD never made it into the wider Western market because of the general acceptance of VHS (which has similar video quality, recordability and longer play time). The larger established consumer equipment manufacturers simply weren't interested in realising another video format into the market with no great tangible benefits over the existing norm. Indeed, VCDs may have never gone anywhere, even in Asia, if not for some good business sense of companies like C-Cube.

As for the video quality of these long-play X/S/VCD templates, that's why my benchmark is at least standard VCD quality. Saying that "it stills looks pleasing", etc., is really rather subjective. What looks pleasing to you may look like crap to the next man. If you can say that your template looks overall as good as standard VCD (i.e., no worse than it), it gives us all a general idea.

Regards.