VideoHelp Forum




+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    is there a big difference in encoding time? how about quality? i'm just curious
    Quote Quote  
  2. Originally Posted by REDi
    is there a big difference in encoding time? how about quality? i'm just curious
    From 2-pass to 3-pass in CCE, there's a little more quality, but not much.
    Over that, it's just a longer conversion time, but no noticeable quality increase.

    Try TMPEG 2.53 in CQ mode. It's just about the same quality as CCE in 2-pass mode. Actually I am getting better result with TMPEG in CQ mode than CCE in 2-pass ( and even 3-pass ) mode.

    kwag
    KVCD.Net - Advanced Video Conversion
    http://www.kvcd.net
    Quote Quote  
  3. hey kwag r u using CQ_VBR or just CQ and what about the 4 pass vbr and 5 pass vbr is there an increase of quality in those modes
    Quote Quote  
  4. Originally Posted by smokingweed3000
    hey kwag r u using CQ_VBR or just CQ and what about the 4 pass vbr and 5 pass vbr is there an increase of quality in those modes
    Hi smokingweed3000:

    I am using CQ mode with TMPGenc 2.53Plus.

    In 4 pass or 5 pass, I guess you mean in CCE, because TMPEG only has 2-passes.

    In CCE there's really no visual quality gain after 3 passes.

    kwag
    KVCD.Net - Advanced Video Conversion
    http://www.kvcd.net
    Quote Quote  
  5. A while back ago, there was a large thread about this issue..
    The person who started it had done alot of research and showed with some graphpictures that 5pass acctually was the best.
    4 & 6 passes was acctually the same and 3 & 7 and 2& 8 was acctually the same. Think he used BitrateViewer to get this info, so, 4-5 passes sounds the best. Couldn't find the thread tho..
    - Twin -
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    ok.. well looks like i'll be sticking to CCE with 4 pass.. takes my machine around 9 hours to do a full DVD rip using dvd2svcd.. which seems about right for my 1gig athlon with 384megs of pc133 sdram.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member vhelp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    New York
    Search Comp PM
    REDi,

    9hours???

    Just out of curiosity, R U using any filters?
    And, what res. did you use, ie 352x480, 480x480, etc. ??

    I have done many 1 hour captures of star trek voyager shows and then
    encoded them each to (my old method) SVCD (352x480.cq_vbr1850.2520)
    and the whole encoding process took me -3 hours!
    Below is basically the process I used way back then.

    * Source: captured satallite via ATW card
    * vdub (filters: resize/sharpen/deinterlace)
    * frameserved to
    * tmpg 12x (no filters here)
    * burned with Nero
    * planed on Apex AD-1500, on 13" TV

    All this with an T-Brd 900Mhz w/ PC133 128mb ram

    Basically, the above method/process has ben scrubbed, he, he...
    I have since, many months ago used a better method. Also now includes
    a few slightly altered methods I'm currently beta testing now, and looks
    good so far (thanks to kwag's CQ mode) This CQ mode is something I kind
    of over looked. When Kwag introduced his template, it got me started
    with some encoding ideas

    -vhelp
    Quote Quote  
  8. 9 hours with VBR 4 pass is ok, read normal and even fast for a 1 gig hz proc!

    if you do encode this same movie in CQ mode it will probably be 2 or 3 hours

    btw, SVCD is 480x480 NTSC, 480x576 for PAL
    it's of no use comparing other resolutions and other encoding methods!

    gr,

    Bart.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

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