VideoHelp Forum




Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. Sorry for the long newbie post:

    I'm trying to get the best quality possible from my sony dv camera and have success getting up to the encoding process. Here is my process:

    -Import a 5 minute movie from the cam into iMovie 4.01
    -Edit the movie
    -Share the movie from iMovie using the export as Full Quality DV.
    -Use that exported dv file and open it in ffmpegX 0.0.9q and use the following settings:

    Preset DVD ffmpeg
    Calculated video bitrate is 3742
    Video size is 720x480, DVD, NTSC 29.97
    Audio is PCM (DV), 448 kbits, 48000hz, Stereo, CBR
    Filters - > Deinterlace checked
    Options: High Quality checked, two-pass encoding, decode with QT, letterbox unchecked, QMin 1 QMax 10

    I take the resulting file and burn it. I'm getting closer to a very good quality video but can't get it the way I want it. Ive tried the mpeg2enc settings with less luck and a ton of other settings.

    Now, to explain further, I am able to achieve the quality I want if I use TMPGEnc xPress 3.0 on my windows box. However, my wintel box doesn't have the necessary power to do a movie over about 5-10 minutes, and my goal is to have 60+ minutes on a DVD.

    I've tried the BitVice encoder and that come pretty close to tmpgenc.

    I've searched all over for the "proper" ffmpegX settings, there are so many, but I am looking for setting that will achieve a similar quality to what tmpgenc delivers.

    The process again is Camera->iMovie Import->iMovie edit->Share full quality dv->ffmpegX->burn a quality DVD.

    Can anyone suggest the proper settings for the highest quality DVD with ffmpegX?

    Thanks.
    Mike

  2. Explorer Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Middle Earth
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by fstrat76
    Filters - > Deinterlace checked
    Options: decode with QT, QMin 1 QMax 10
    According to a previous thread, QuickTime decoding will deinterlace using a single field, which will degrade quality.
    The default Adaptive Quantizer range is 2/20, that seems like a good start. Also, I read on the site that Qmin=1 is not recommended (although that wasn't in the ffmpeg options section).

  3. More importantly, why are you de-interlacing at all? If your original is interlaced, you gain nothing by forcing the file to progressive scan, especially if you are viewing on a conventional TV which will NOT do progressive scan anyway. It is far better to keep as much of the file in its original context as possible. Leaving in interlaced format and allowing the DVD player to format as progressive if you are using on a compatible monitor will yield superior results.

  4. Thanks.

    I tried unchecking the de-interlace and it looks better.

    I noticed things that need fixing on my sample movie:

    1) The final DVD doesn't have that "live" video look to it, although it is very satisfactory. It looks more like "film". I realize that I'll lose something due to the compression of the original DV file. Is there another setting that clean that up a little more to give the "live" look or perhaps a setting in the iMovie export I should use?

    2) Also, the contrast is a bit high, therefore bright whites are blurred a little. This is also evident on the original DV. I can clean this up on the iMovie export settings but I noticed that ffmepgX has filters for brightness and contrast but for mencoder mpeg4 only?


    Sorry, more questions:

    3) In addition, for the fun of it, I increased the video bit rate to 8000, even though the "best" button returns 3742. Is there any advantage at all to the quality by increasing the bit rate above what the best button values?

    4) Since I have a 16x DVD+-RW DL, I plan on eventually using the Dual Layer media (when the media prices start to drop). Will ffmpegX support the output file sizes over 8gb?



    Thanks everyone for your help, its starting to look real good and time to register.
    Mike

  5. As to high bit rates, no, if your value is too high, as evidenced by blue numbers in the bit-rate field, not only will you waste disk space for no increase in quality, but depending on your play back medium, you can potentially make the video not able to play back, or play back with stuttering video.
    Not sure about file size, but I have heard nothing about a built in files size limit; certainly the bit-rate calculator does not mind disk sizes over 8000 MB.
    AS for the film vs. video issue, most people would not complain, seeing as film is far superior to DV. but that being said, it sounds like the first thing to try is to bump up your bitrate just a bit, but not into the blue, and set Qmin to 2

  6. Originally Posted by fstrat76
    The final DVD doesn't have that "live" video look to it, although it is very satisfactory. It looks more like "film".
    In FFmpegX 1.0.0, full support of interlaced Quicktime decoding will be added. This will allow a result exactly like the original DV.

  7. That sounds great, when is version 1.0 to be released? Do you need beta testers?
    Mike

  8. Unfortunately there is still no precise timeframe about the release of version 1.0.0, which involves an enormous amount of work. All I can say is that it is scheduled for year 2005.

  9. Just a trivial question that has bugged me for a while, but if v1.0 is on the visible horizon, why is the current version 0.0.9 instead of .9? just seems the nomenclature is implying the code is not even alpha, when that is obviously not the case

  10. Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    If you have BitVice why are you fooling around with ffmpegX?

    For encoding DV, BitVice is one of the best encoders on the Mac (IMHO).

    Also tryout mccoder from Main Concept (it's pretty fast).

  11. The ffmpegX numbering system was intended to vary from 0.0.1 to 1.0.0, on an ideal linear scale separing what has been done to what still needs to be done. As I tend to be humble about what has been done, we are still at 0.0.N.

    Initially, series 0.N.0 was scheduled, but further to more ambitious planning, only a scale of 1.0.0 would match the leap separing it from 0.0.9 (both in features, design and amount of work required).

    Also, 1.0.0 is not intended to be the last version. Simply, the first evolutionary cicle will be over and the project will evolve towards a different beast.

    Please note that we're talking about the future. The current version is 0.0.9r, and I'm working right now on 0.0.9s.




Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!