New kvcdx3 templets with strange reS! Laserdisc!!!

[baker]

NEW KVCDX3 TEMPLET HAS JUST ARRIVED WITH A RES OF 544X576(OR SIMILAR)

www.kvcd.net

I was pondering to myself today if it would be worth it to use a new kvcd templet if a one cd templet came out as I would have to re-encode the film to make it dvd compatible in the futuer. But if this one works then it will!!!

Does anybody know in the future when converting to dvd would it make more sense to up the res using a resize or down it 352x576. If a upsize looks good then I willl stick to this templet like glue!!!

Baker

[bbb]

Keep you pondering to yourself you kwagologist!

544X576 is not a valid DVD resolution. This is quite obvious to you. As such, I consider this post pure hype akin to SPAM.

It seems that Kwag and his followers are desparately trying to make a Kwag standard ... however, that won't happen as manufacturers stick with the DVD standard.

Too bad he and his followers are not disclosing the ill consequences of using his incompatible resolutions, GOP structures, and insufficiently low bitrates.

***You can make cvds/svcds look good without resorting to odd resolutions and nonstandard GOPs. Any moderator and experienced encoder would agree.

**The big kwagology deception is that only his special templates can give you great quality. Not true. For good quality you basically need a good source (e.g., dvd), a respectable average bitrate (e.g., not lower than 1600 kbps at CVD resolutions), and a basic knowledge of the encoder functions/options.

*Furthermore, anyone who tells you that they can fit 1 movie (generally 90 minutes+) per standard cdr at great/near-dvd quality is untrustworthy. For newbies, realize this: it's not magic to fit more minutes on a cdr, you just have to lower the bitrate. The side effect, however, is poorer video quality (e.g., more blockiness). To maintain decent quality, you can fit at most 55-60 minutes per cdr (50 minutes should be the cutoff point for people with discerning eyes). This is why many people are eager to move off to recordable dvds that can store much more data than a cdr and allow for higher bitrates, thereby not having to sacrifice quality.

[paulstamat]

As an impartial observer of the Kwag stuff...I actually tried it and the results, while a little buggy gave a really good picture. And to be frank it does say that one should burn using these templates as a non compliant vcd - which does say it all when it comes to "standards."

It's an interesting alternative to dvd for the time being if you're not looking to change the world with a new "standard." And the picture isn't bad - although I haven't played too much with it to say that it's a worthwhile alternative to existing templates that do fit the "standard."

[baker]

DON'T CALL ME A KWAGOLIGIST!!!!!!

I mean that seriously, I like kwags stuff, but never use it. I am a cvd man my self.

The only time I go X is when I am trying to stick 240mins of kareoke onto 1 80 min cd.

The res is some kind of dvd standard alos. i believe.

Baker

[snowmoon]

bbb: I'm with you.

calling kv"vcd"x3 does not make it a standard. Resorting to trickery to achieve good results is a sign that you are lazy and cannot be bothered with making a compliant disk. I have always opposed these butchery templates as nothing more than desperation, just invest in a standards complaint DVD player and invest some time to figure out how to make the best standards compliant disks.

I'm sorry, but everytime I've seen the resulting MPEG it's always been riddled with mpeg artifacts that might be easier for some people to pallete, but they are defenatly not worth the loss of standardization.

[kwag]

I'm sorry, but everytime I've seen the resulting MPEG it's always been riddled with mpeg artifacts that might be easier for some people to pallete, but they are defenatly not worth the loss of standardization.

You must be living in Mars my friend

As for standards, this is what I think:

Standards are good. For some periods of time, but not for ever.
As being lazy, it's the other way around. It's really easy to make a standard VCD or SVCD. Just "Click and Run". That's lazy!.
I was never satisfied with VCD or SVCD "standards", so I push the limits.
And to me, it's really stupid to go out and buy a "standard" DVD player, and "see" if it plays my VCD's. On the other hand, when I buy a DVD player, I choose one that "plays" my collection. NOT the other way around.
Standards? Yeah right, that's why we're stuck with Microsoft
If you saw an artifact on the KVCDx3 samples, I suggest you see a doctor.
If you want to stick to "standards", fine, enjoy your lower resolutions
I won't
And as I've said before, You ain't seen nothing yet :P

-kwag

[snowmoon]

I guess we see things diffrently.


I can spot mpeg bitrate starvation and long GOP's a mile away. Sure the stardards are easy to do poorly, but I guess my responce has been the other way around... Get a better encoder, better source, better pre-filtering, play with diffrent settings. My results are excellent and I didn't have to break the spec. I also play these back on a 42" HDTV so quality is a major concern.

You have chosen to see what you can get away with and that is your choice.

[thxkid]

We are not STUCK with Microsoft, you may at any time use Linux or invent your own operating system, or play around with microsoft and tweak the settings.
Nobody forced you to use Windows, just like nobody forces you to use a standard VCD or SVCD setting either. But just like windows if you want to stay with the majority then you stay with windows, if you don't want to take time and look around for a DVD player that will play a SVCD at 704x480 at 6000 bitrate (daewoo 5800 does) then stay with the majority and buy those major brands of DVD players like SONY and Toshiba where you are limited to what you can make as a VCD or SVCD and playback on them.

[drewson99]

Here is my opinion on this (I have seen this argument between kwag and x-person so many times, I now must put in my 2 cents)

I began in this world of ripping and encoding almost a year ago, and I was ripping DVDs to VCD. My very first vcd was done with the standard VCD template in TMPGEnc. It was 90 minutes, it spanned 2 discs, and it still looked like sh*t.

Then, I began reading the forums, and I read some of kwag's posts, and eventually, got up the initiative to download one of his templates and use it.

WHAT A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE! - I LOVE THESE TEMPLATES!

I went from making 2-disc vcds that looked like crap (with the TMPGEnc template) to making 2-disc vcds that looked absolutely stunning - like commercial DVDs (with KVCD template)


However....


When I attempted to burn the same 90 to 120 minute movies to a 1-disc vcd using the KVCD template, I did see some artifacts.

Time was no matter to me, I had all the quality settings maxed out for the best possible output file, but no matter what, during high motion scenes, I always ended up seeing some artifacts/blocks.


THE VERDICT? "SO WHAT?"

Why?

Because feature-length movies were never meant to fit on on 1 CD. Period. If they could fit a feature length film on a cd-r without any artifacts at DVD quality they would release commercial movies on CD, at a much cheaper cost to the studio.

WHEN MAKING A VCD I NEVER INTENDED TO USE LESS THAN 2 DISCS BECAUSE I KNOW IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO HAVE MY CAKE AND EAT IT TOO.

I hate having to swap discs half way through a movie. I am a spoiled little sh*t that way, and I own that.

So what do I do? Do I whine about blockiness during the race scene in my 1-disc VCD of Fast and Furious?

No. I am not a moron. I bought a DVR-104 and said goodbye to the VCD format.

To this day, I still have occasion from time to time to make a VCD (home movies, VHS to VCD, short films, downloaded stuff, etc...)

...and when I do I USE KVCD EVERY TIME BECAUSE THE MAN HAS DONE THE WORK AND IT PUSHES LIMITS I DON'T HAVE TIME TO PUSH MYSELF.

Anyway, my 2 cents for what they're worth. I'm sure kwag'll tell me I'm doing something wrong or need my eyes checked, but I gotta say what i feel, and I do love the guy's templates. (being realistic - not 120mins on 1 disc)

Andy

[kwag]

We are not STUCK with Microsoft

HaHaHa! Just walk into a corporate office, and what do you see on the desktops? Crap, spelled Windows. Oh yeah, I use Linux. I use FreeBSD ( my choice ), but try to use it in a corporation. Serverwise, sure, Unix does fine. Desktop wise? We're stuck!. And now they say:
"Where do you want to go today?"
Be careful!, maybe 10 years from now, when you open your fridge late at night, the fridge will say:
"What would you like to eat today?"
Then you turn your toaster on, and a message pops up:
"Private failure error, system must restart!" You lost your meal. You desperately run to the bathroom, and when you flush your toilet, the toilet says:
"DOWNLOADING" Beware of Microstuff!.

-kwag

[drewson99]

lmao

andy

[baker]

The kvcdx3 templets look crap on my moniter!!!! I am surprised about this after hearing all the talk at kvcd.net.!!! By the way its the matrix sample. Anychance of a smaller sample also? 10mbs is a bit much for us 56ks.

More talk tommorrow when I try it in my dvd player.

Baker

[drewson99]

kwag always says: it may look bad on the monitor, but when you put it into the set-top and watch it on a TV, the artifacts dissapear.

lol
Andy

[kwag]

The kvcdx3 templets look crap on my moniter!!!! I am surprised about this after hearing all the talk at kvcd.net.!!! By the way its the matrix sample. Anychance of a smaller sample also? 10mbs is a bit much for us 56ks.

More talk tommorrow when I try it in my dvd player.

Baker

Viewed on WMP, yes, it looks like crap. Viewed on WinDVD, looks very good. Burned on a CD as non-standard VCD, looks like the original DVD, viewed on ANY HDTV.

-kwag

[baker]

A report for you kwag:

My phillips dvd 622 has played everything until this new kvcdx3.

Havent tried the mpeg 2 version yet but I think it will be successful.

I am thinking of createiong a comparison on this site for all kvcd vcd dvd cvd svcd. showing good points and bad points about them.

cvd vs kvcdx3 will be intresting. maybe not as sharp but quailty wise...

Baker

[kwag]

A report for you kwag:

My phillips dvd 622 has played everything until this new kvcdx3.

Havent tried the mpeg 2 version yet but I think it will be successful.

I am thinking of createiong a comparison on this site for all kvcd vcd dvd cvd svcd. showing good points and bad points about them.

cvd vs kvcdx3 will be intresting. maybe not as sharp but quailty wise...

Baker

http://www.kvcd.net/dvd-models
Check the x3 column, updated daily, as users report every day.
Right now, looks like are Panasonic and Sony, have the best mpeg chip sets.

-kwag