how do i keep the divx quallity on the vcd?

[shamway]

i convertsed an avi divx movie with tmpeg to vcd, the original file was 705m and the vcd is 840m, but the quallty isn't good.
how do i keep the quallity the same?

[Truman]

The VCD resolution is 352x288 /240. I guess, the DivX resolution is higher. Do you really expect the same quality?
Go for XVCD, increase the bitrate, get even a larger filesize, if you like.

[shamway]

what the settings i should put on the tmpeg?

[Truman]

Depends on what you want.
How long is the avi? How many CDs do you want to use? Do you want to play it on standalone DVDplayer? Which formats can that player play? etc.etc....

[ccngo]

So, avi is better than mpg vcd then right?

[DiViNeLeFT]

divx is better than mpg if you are looking at quality compared to filesize..... but with compatibility, mpg is definitly better considering i garun-god-damn-tee that you wont find a single stand alone dvd player that plays divx cds.

i choose to use my tv out on my geforce 2 to play divx movies on my tv... so therefor divx is better for me... but someone that has a dvd player that supports XSVCD and doesnt have tvout on their comp... the choice is obvious of which is better.

[Truman]

NO. It isn't that easy to say this is better than that.
There are many ways to make a VCD look well, but this a quite complicated way.
The main reason people make (S/X)VCD is, that you can play it on a standalone dvd player, adding menus and chapters. What do you do with an .avi?

[ccngo]

Is avi better than mpg in video quality?

[Truman]

2nd NO to you. A well made MPEG-2 will look better than DivX. AVI quality depends on the codec and its settings. There are hundreds of avi codecs. MPEG is a standard and a different format than AVI.

[ccngo]

Because i have tried many a times to convert avi to vcd mpg but the quality is way worse. I don't know what i am doing wrong. I use tmpgenc to convert. I use 2pass vbr also. It just looks blochy. help!!!!!!

[Truman]

Which bitrate did you set?Resolution, Filters etc,etc....
You may post the template or tellme the important settings.
Keep in mind, that a divx.avi is heavily compressed alreaddy. I mean crap in, crap out.

[shamway]

well the avi is 1hr 26min, and i want to burn it on 2 cd's.
i want to play on a stand alone dvd that support only vcd.

[ccngo]

I use 2000 average bitrate with 2100 and 1900 being max and min with padding enabled. On the advance tab, i check de-interlace even and field. The res. is 352x240. And the motion picture is set on high. The vbv buffer size is 40. What other settings should i use?

[Truman]

@ shamway, so you can only load a VCD template in TMPG. To increase the quality a bit, play around with the VirtualDub filters or the TMPG filters.
@ccngo, I think it wont be better than CBR 2000. But it is your choise.
motion search precision: High quality (slow)
You want to make an XVCD, right? Did you think about increasing the resolution as well, for example 352x480.
btw, I have no idea what your player can play. You must find it out yourself.

[DiViNeLeFT]

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-09-06 15:28:44, Truman wrote:
2nd NO to you. A well made MPEG-2 will look better than DivX. AVI quality depends on the codec and its settings. There are hundreds of avi codecs. MPEG is a standard and a different format than AVI.
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

i have to disagree... a well made divx will smoke any form of vcd... divx uses 10:1 compression, therefor the filesize will be smaller than a mpgs... therefore you can have larger bitrates will smaller filesizes. compare a 1 cd divx rip with a 1 cd (XS)VCD rip... divx WILL win. if it doesnt, the divx wasnt made right.

[Truman]

@DiViNeLeFT, well a 1CD X/S VCD will look like shit, a 1CD DIVX does it too.
It is useless to argue about DivX vs SVCD, because it seems to be a kind of ideology. I trust my eyes, believe me, I did all DivX, VCD, XVCD, SVCD, XSVCD.

[Truman]

@ccngo, I have posted a TMPG SVCD template here. If you consider to make SVCD, you may try that.

[shamway]

could you tell what fillters should i do to make a good quallity TMPG, cause even when i got the file to be 1.33g it's stil wasn't the divx quallity.

[flaninacupboard]

shamway,

Try using the noise reduction filter. the problem is DivX creates a -LOT- of artifacts, which TMPEnc faithfully tries to reproduce, running out of bits for the actual image. noise reduction will lessen this effect.


Divine Left? you're just plain wrong. larger bitrates with smaller filesizes? no. you can have smaller bitrates with, uh, smaller filesizes. DivX and mpeg are two enitrely idfferent formats, and not even comaprable. DivX's hevily sacrifice quality, for convenience (1CD) wheras VCD, and XSVCD come on 2-3 cd's, but look an awful lot better, plus work on pc's, dvd players and vcd players. totally diffrent.

[DiViNeLeFT]

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-09-07 16:58:42, flaninacupboard wrote:
shamway,

Divine Left? you're just plain wrong. larger bitrates with smaller filesizes? no. you can have smaller bitrates with, uh, smaller filesizes. DivX and mpeg are two enitrely idfferent formats, and not even comaprable. DivX's hevily sacrifice quality, for convenience (1CD) wheras VCD, and XSVCD come on 2-3 cd's, but look an awful lot better, plus work on pc's, dvd players and vcd players. totally diffrent.
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

wasnt the point of this topic to compare avi to mpg or at least say how to get divx quality on a vcd format??? when i said larger bitrate to smaller file size i am compareing the divx bitrate and divx filesize to a mpg bitrate and mpg filesize... in comparison a divx file will have a larger bitrate and smaller filesize to a mpg.

and as for divx "hevily" sacrificing quality... ive had people watch a 2 cd divx rip with me before that thought it was the dvd until i got up to switch cds. but like i said in my original post on this topic... you cant say one format is better than the other... you have to say which format suites my needs.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: DiViNeLeFT on 2001-09-12 12:26:13 ]</font>

[Peter]

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-09-06 15:28:44, Truman wrote:
2nd NO to you. A well made MPEG-2 will look better than DivX. AVI quality depends on the codec and its settings. There are hundreds of avi codecs. MPEG is a standard and a different format than AVI.
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

A well made MPEG-2 will NEVER look better than a well made DiVX (Smart Bitrate Control) if you use the same amounts of CD's. The DiVX codec just has a newer and better compression.

But I usually make SVCD on 2, somtimes 3 CD's to play in my standalone player and the quality is pretty good. It's just waiting for the standalone players that can play DiVX

[Anonymous65]

Divx, or MPEG-4 which is the correct name for it, is a newer compression format made for better multimedia support (PC's), supporting layers of compressed "video" on top each other. It was not really designed to be better then Mpeg-2, but to have more features in the stream and compression algotitm.

[flaninacupboard]

god damn you're silly!

"in comparison a divx file will have a larger bitrate and smaller filesize to a mpg. "

no! this = wrong. the file size will be smaller, yes, as will the bit rate. the "rate" at which "bits" i.e. 0's and 1's, data, information, video, sound, are displayed is therefore lower. follow me:

a 120 minute movie, spread across two 80min cd'sin mpeg will have a bit rate of approx. 1660kbps.
on one cdr as a divx it will be 638kbps. see? its smaller? even if the divx was on two cdrs, it would still only be 1433kbps, as vcd/svcd will get 800meg on an 80 min cd, divx will only have 700meg. so you were wrong.

[TomSem]

DivX or (s)VCD ?
I think Divx is much better in quality / compression
But i still make (s)vcd because
- I have a slow computer
- I have a 15 inch monitor
- I don't have an expensief TV out videocart
- I don't have an expensief DTS audio card
- I don't have a long cable to wire my TV to my PC
- I don't want to boot my pc to watch a movie
- I want to watch movies with my friends in my living room
- I like to play with the remote in stead of my keyboard

I ll keep some good divx movies only for the day
the divx players will apears in my local store.

Devineleft was right : you choose the format wich suites your needs.

tommy

[Russ Rip]

Can all modern DVD players play SVCD??? Mine is a phillips 750 and it can play VCD 2.0 as can my friends. If I burn a SVCD at the higher resolution can I just trate it as a VCD 2.0 .dat format and throw it on CD??? I suppose you are all going to say well trya it and see - but I just want to know if all modern commercial DVD players can play SVCD!??? .......... Hope that makes sense

[porto]

hi,

DivX can produce a better image to the eye but since it is not a official standard I'll stick with (S)vcd for the following reasons:

- you can play it in ANY vcd/dvd player (computer or stand-alone);
- since it is a standard it is long-lasting in use;
- he won't whine for codecs which downloads at that Microsoft site always fails;
- the quality can well be improved if you encode with tmpenc, I got far better results than with Xing of LSX

Further, on a computermonitor the quality is worse than viewing on a televisionscreen and since I accept the fact that dvd quality is not possible on 2 vcd's (unless you want to store your 2 hour movie on 6 cd's) I am VERY happy with the quality it brings to me now.

[DiViNeLeFT]

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-09-13 07:29:00, flaninacupboard wrote:
god damn you're silly!

"in comparison a divx file will have a larger bitrate and smaller filesize to a mpg. "

no! this = wrong. the file size will be smaller, yes, as will the bit rate. the "rate" at which "bits" i.e. 0's and 1's, data, information, video, sound, are displayed is therefore lower. follow me:

a 120 minute movie, spread across two 80min cd'sin mpeg will have a bit rate of approx. 1660kbps.
on one cdr as a divx it will be 638kbps. see? its smaller? even if the divx was on two cdrs, it would still only be 1433kbps, as vcd/svcd will get 800meg on an 80 min cd, divx will only have 700meg. so you were wrong.
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

ok, i was under the assumption that the divx codec used higher compression, therefor you could fit a larger bitrate into a file than compared to the same size mpg file... so the higher the compression, the more 0s and 1s you can fit on a cd... am i definitly wrong in this statement??

i never said i know it all and you shouldn't fall to "ha ha, your wrong!!" tactics just because someone disagrees with you... prove them wrong with facts... which it seems you have... but dont gloat about it.

[Peter]

The bitrate means the number of bits the decoder is receiving per second and has nothing to do with the output enerated.

[kazuni]

uh , truman, in terms of your arguement of divx vs mpeg2, you are actually wrong.

1.) it is always better than the other if u set the birate to a higher extent. trust me, i had ben fooling around wih my capture card and made some 5000+kbps birate divx videos with 640x480, and when i use my radeon to plouse the thing to my HDTV i can't even see a jitter, but when i have the same birate as in mpeg2, i can still see some smearing going on when scenes are changing. it is because of the limitation of the codec, while MPEG is still running the format of gobble sequence (IBBPBBPBBPBBP, etc) and DIVX can be keyed with any kind of gobble sequence (yes, u can set all of them into I frames, therefore no quality loss) .

so in general, it's not the quality we are talknig here, we're talking about the qulaity vs size. and divx is the master among here.

[DiViNeLeFT]

kazuni....
just out of curiosity.... why do you choose to capture instead of rip the movies, and encode after that? i dont have a capture card so i have never messed with that... but ive heard before on the forums that rips are way better quality than captures... or are you just capturing on movies you cant rip??