120min on VCD or DVD quality on VCD

[Condor]

I suggest you to use kVCD templates from www.KVCD.net. They works very well. I have tested on my Technics DV-170 which does not support S-VCD and it works very well.

[vitualis]

I don't like posts like these because they always give people (especially newbies) the wrong impression. There are already several (useful and informative) active posts on this template and we don't need any more misinformation.

For newbies, this is NOT a VCD but an XVCD template with all the problems inherent. I suggest you search for those other threads to find more information on it.

Secondly, the term "DVD quality" is used rather loosely. I doubt even the guy who created this template would boldy stand up and claim that this template creates video that is transparent to DVD video.

Regards.

[holistic]

Secondly, the term "DVD quality" is used rather loosely.

NO $HIT - My grandfathers super 8 film is near DVD quality

If it isn't MPEG2 with the bitrates/resolutions that are part of the D1 spec then it is just a poor imatation.

The whole VCD / SVCD will be a distant laughable memory in a few short years once HTDV becomes the norm and we all see DVD for the visual limitations it has. (crap - never end with a preposition .... o well)
.... THEN out comes a new 'codec' with 50 Mb/s bitrates - 10 point surround and whats this it fits on a new........... 200 Gb disk.

How do we 'rip' how do we make 120 DVD with 'super DVD' quality on a DVD. I rest now

[Condor]

It is better to test the kVCD before writing that it is laughable. I know that this format is not standard VCD format, but nevertheless it is working and quality is good and file is smaller. Regarding DVD "quality" I agree that maybe MPEG1 is not able to keep the same quality like MPEG2, but (AGAIN) test MPEG1 352x288 and MPEG1 704x576 --- you will see difference. I u will compare side by side kVCDx2 (704x576) and DVD, maybe u will recognize what is played from kVCDx2 and what from DVD. In case that you will see only one of them, u will not able to say whether u r watching kVCDx2 or DVD, because (I think) the quality is too close.
Do not forget that big file does not mean good qauality and small file means bad quality .....see DIVX - on 1CD u have video with same resolution like DVD, a lot of subtitles, couple audio streams and of course in AC3 ....................

[vhelp]

condor,

I read this post while at work.

Yes, I agree that it is misleading, cause you didn't specify SOURCE!! and
other background info in order to reach (close to) your post's claim: ie,
It would of ben more appropriate if you said via:
* DVD source...
* Film works best 23fps (or not)
* which DVD players will, and will not work, or cause problems
* background knowledge of IVTC (for captures) require needed this... and
even this (IVTC) present loads of problems for newbies...
* bla, bla, bla... etc.
...well, just off the top of my head, but Moderator was trying to
express this in so many words.

People (newbies) seeing this post, and they'd 'of jumped on it, tried it,
got disapointed, and before you know it, floods of post, "it's not DVD"
"it's not working", "someone help with", "what's IVTC", "How do I make it
work for my captures", bla, bla, bla.

I have tried this template... doesn't work on my Apex AD-1500, and AD-500
after hours of trial and error, ...and I mean hours. However, change to
MPEG-1, to MPEG-2, and it does work - quality you ask??? ... ... ...hmmmm

I'm sure you all get the picture.

Holistic,
yes, i agree their too. There's always something NEW that hits the shelves
even before they work out all the kinks in what WAS the best, well, you get
my meaning..

later.
-vhelp

There seem to be many posts about "super templates" and how you can fit 120 minutes od "DVD Quality", Ive tried a few of these including KWAGS and was disapointed with the quality & compatability.

If a claim sounds to good to be true ....................

[vhelp]

condor,

>> you will see only one of them, u will not able to say whether u r
>> watching kVCDx2 or DVD, because (I think) the quality is too close.
The only difference is the resolution. Don't be fooled by the template thing.
DVD resolution is 720x480 vs. 704x480 (may as well both are 720x480)
The "too close" you are refering to is the resolution. You could have
changed the "Rate control Mode" to VBR or CBR and you would of thought the
quality was "too close". Its the much higher resolution that is effecting
the quality, not the GOP or matrix (though they help in * reducing filesize,
and * allow for slight playback via higher resolution*mpeg1*GOP*lowerBitrate
to give the illusion of allowable (non-standard) playback and quality at such
non-standard VCD, or somthing like that, he, he... made sense to me - it's
late night for me.

so, there's obvisouly no contest when you pit 352x240/288 up against a
resolution of 704x480/576!! Basically, what you're saying is, quality looks
better if you raise the resolution higher, he, he...

As for me, I'd much rather stick with standard VCD, yes, standard VCD
(done right) can look just as good as DVD rip to standard VCD.
OR, mpeg2, CVD and upward, cause MPEG-2 is more DVD related, and
supports other features, though I have no use for them at the moment

Sure I can get sharper looking if I up the res. by doubling 240, hence 480
and width from 352 to 704.
Another variation to misleading, via this thread is people R going to think that,
oh, if I capture at 704/720 DVD, i'll have DVD quality! wrong! Now, you have
people starting to believe this, and everyone's gonna go out and burn more
fuses on trying to capture at 720 w/ bad results. All in the name of DVD
quality... and about the only way you CAN capture at 720x480 is by using
the PIC codec, a variation of the MJPEG, which by the way, is lossy quality, $$
and from my experience, is NOT DVD quality, and does NOT measure up to what I feel
is good quality.

D_Head,
true, true, BUT, I still remain believing that NOTHING is impossible, well, almost
nohting. You can't capture 720x480 uncompressed/no codec w/out frame drops.
It's just not POSSIBLE!! he, he... Just this evening, I tried a variation, w/out
any codecs, on my XP 1700+ and I was able to cap at 720x480 for about 40 seconds
before frames started to drop! OH, well. Thought I had it, but NOT!!
But, sooner or later, kwag and friends w/ figure it out, and get close to DVD
quality. I'm sure. Just a matter of time.

Well, that about raps it up for me.
nity, night!
-vhelp

[kwag]

@Condor:

Sorry that you've been flamed here. It usually happens because some people just don't want to accept the truth.

Here's the sample for all the "Nay" people here that still don't believe that you can achieve "Visual DVD quality" in a CD-R.

http://www.kvcd.net/2cdsamp.mpg
It's 15 seconds of the lobby scene in "The Matrix", and it's 3MB in size.
Done with the KVCDx2 2-CD template.

Now, I compared this sample against my original "Matrix" DVD, and even at 2 inches from the TV, you can hardly tell the difference.
This sample was made directly from the .d2v project file without any kind of filtering ( TemporalSmoother, etc ).

And I sustain my facts, and I don't care what anyone says.
I still believe ( and SEE in the samples ) of all the tests and research I've done, that MPEG-1 beats the crap out of MPEG-2 below 2,000Kbps. P.E.R.I.O.D.

See for yourself. And try, , just try to do that sample with any MPEG-2 encoder at 2,300Kbps 704x480 and get that result.
It may be the encoders, it may be the decoders. But what counts, is what you see. And I haven't seen ANY MPEG-2 sample from anyone at 704x480 at MAX 2,300Kbps that looks like that.

The average bit rate for that clip is 1,442Kbps
Don't try that with your regular MPEG-2 encoder 8)

kwag

[pacoreguenga]

I think everyone is right... to himself.

Everything Condor and Kwag have said is true. kvcd's template is just marvelous, but not an Industry standard. Just because is NOT an standard doesn't mean it doesn't work.
It works. And it rocks.

As wel as uncompressed digital video can be captured at 4:4:4 CCIR601 in all its glory. With a computer built-in digital video input. In an SGI Octane MXI with a stone+wire array, it can be done.
And it plays realtime also.

But we all should realize we are working at home with home equipment. Cheap equipment (The Flame System I use at work costed $360,000 dollars and it's an after effects on steroids and I'm sure I wouldn't spend that much to edit my children's school festivals) and we all should try to get as much from our home equipment as we can. As this guys are trying. They are not implementing a standard. They are experimenting and sharing their excitation and wisdom with us. And who knows? Thay might be implementing the next standard as well! And what do we do? We almost crucify them!!!
Why? Why us? Are we all computer scientists? Are we all engineers? Are we all digital media Professionals? Are we all THE experts ourselves? Who are we to criticize someone's enthusiasm?
Don't forget equipment doesn't do the job by itself. The most important thing to get the job done is the guy who sits in front of the monitor. And its cleverness.

So if someone relieves you all from having to figure out how things work and gives you just one more tool to ease your work or to let your creative juices flow, pat him in the back and thank him. Don't try to kick his ass.

[Condor]

Thank you a lot for your post Pacoreguenga. I have been suprised from their reactions. I wanted to share my experience. I did not tell that Earth is flat.....

Condor

[offline]

Good points all!

Just to throw a spanner in the works, most if not 99% of comercial
titles on DVD are poorly pre & post filtered. It is cheaper to throw
lots of bitrate away on a master than to actually preprocess the image.
It is not suprising that near DVD quality can be managed on cdr today when compared to a cheaply made DVD screened on an low res interlaced analog TV.

Let's see what blu wave (or whatever the successor to dvd is called)
will do on an HDTV

[energy80s]

Have you seen any of the new "Superbit" DVD's yet? Much higher bitrates than existing discs. The downside being that you don't get all the extras on the disc that you do at present.

Also, there is no such thing as HDTV in Europe. Just though I'd let you know! 8)

[zizou108]

kwag duuude,

I burnt your 15s clip of Matrix lobby scene to CDRW, played it back on my Pioneer DV-333. It was frelling flawless! I truly could not believe that a VCD could look as good (or nearly) as a DVD. Now I know it is possible.

Is it all in the re-structured GOP? Or does the different Q matrix play a significant role in saving bits?

Like you said, I could not tell the difference from the DVD. Perhaps if they were playing side-by-side, I could, but just watching this clip, I would have thought it was a DVD - no visible blockiness, even in this high-action scene. I have been converting AVIs to SVCDs recently, and have become used to the blocky artifacts in high-motion scenes. I also had been sure that MPEG2 was better than MPEG1.

Now that I know my player will play your "KVCD", I know what is possible. Basically DVD quality at under 1500kbps average. Amazing.

zizou