Tmpgenc VS CCE (Is there even a comparison)?

[Trenton_Net]

Hi,

If I were to encode the same video with Tmpgenc at the highest settings on 2 pass, compared to CCE and its 4 pass system, would there be a significat diffrence? Or would the diffrence only be marginal?

Thanks,

[Kdiddy]

Depends on what you are encoding..I can ONLY speak on VCDs..
my personal experience and opinion tells me while CCE has superior speed, quality blows....TMPG has superior quality but lacks in speed....i am a quality man, I can leave my PC encoding while I sleep..so speed is no real issue to me...

but like I said, that is for VCDs...and I really think CCE was aimed more for SVCDs

[homerpez]

I agree here. CCE barely works at all for MPEG-1, despite what Im told. I get corrupt file sizes, and "funky" video product for MPEG-1. I think TMPGEnc is still the way to go there.

My observation on quality, should you get CCE to work:

TMPGEnc: Slightly blocky, but fewer "mosquito" pixels flying around. 2-pass VBR is accurate, and audio possible in same encode.

CCE: No blocks, but a constant "dance of the mosquitoes"... (try it sometime, and you'll see what I'm taking about). 3-pass VBR is very good, or very bad (often corrupted for me in end result, it ignores my settings)! Audio must be done separately.

Again, my personal choice is still TMPGEnc, due to the fact it 1) works, and 2) has loads of accurate filtering options should I need them. It would be nice if they could have a fix for dark background colors (they seem to go blocky no matter the bitrate), but all in all excellent.

[vitualis]

I generally agree.

CCE has problems with its MPEG-1 encoding...

However, IMHO believe its MPEG-2 encoding (in terms of both video quality and speed) is superior to that of TMPGEnc.

Regards.

[Trenton_Net]

Yes, I'v heard alot of good things about CCE, but Im wondering if the quality is worth it. For SVCD it performs excelent, but it dosn't resize or multiplex, and for some puzzling reason, SVCD dat files seem quite incompatable with software other than a DVD Player. Tmpgenc or any other software can't open the mpeg after its saved as a DAT file on an SVCD.

I also noted that for Mpeg2, it seems that Tmpgenc takes a long time to load one for conversion. As if its trying to read the whole file first, where as for mpeg1, it just reads as it needs.

[Braindrain]

vitualis - wondering why you think SVCD encoding via CCE is better than TMPG? When I tried CCE for SVCD, I found it gave more optical imperfections than TMPG.

Just my opinion...

[VidGuy]

Actually, be very careful in generalizing. CCE's quality blows for a CONSTANT bitrate MPeg1. But do a 3 or 4-pass VBR Mpeg1 and it's great - I've put 120 minutes on 1 80-minute CD by using VBR MPeg1, then burning as an SVCD (yes, SVCD, not VCD) - this plays in Pioneers and Apex players, and it looks pretty good (about like a VHS tape).

As for dat files - most things don't like dat files - that's why you use VCDGear to "undo" what's done when the file is burned on a CD - then everybody likes it.

[Anonymous65]

I tried converting a short 30 second AVI file in Panasonic, Ligos, Cinema Craft, and Tmpeg, and found that to the naked eye all looked the same except Ligos. Ligos had more grain in the video (noise). Now, this was a quick and easy test, using all default VCD templates, but showed to me that there is not a lot of difference in the image quality between the encoders at default settings.

[vitualis]

<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 2001-08-22 11:24:10, Braindrain wrote:
vitualis - wondering why you think SVCD encoding via CCE is better than TMPG? When I tried CCE for SVCD, I found it gave more optical imperfections than TMPG.

Just my opinion...
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

Ok, this is only my opinion also.

I haven't done any extensive testing, but from "eye-balling" the results, I reckon the multipass CCE is better than the TMPGEnc equivalent (and faster too).

This seems to be even more the case when using CBR MPEG-2 with CCE vs. TMPGEnc.

Regards.

[Braindrain]

Ok, here were my "results". I tried 2 different source files. TMPG 12a (CBR, 2500) and CCE SP (CBR & VBR, 2500) were used.

Yes, CCE SP was way faster but that was irrelevant once multi-pass starting going on. But... CCE SP produced "waviness" when the video was panning. This happened for both sources.

TMPG didn't produce the waviness at all. In terms of overall quality, since it was such a high bit-rate, there wasn't any visible graininess with either product.

I didn't try it at lower bit-rates.

Similar results were also echoed from another person in this board.
Just my 2 cents worth...

[vitualis]

Did you test it out on a TV? Also, did you correctly set the progressive box in CCE (if your video is progressive, you should have it ticked).

I've never done tests at 2500 CBR as it's not really a realistic bitrate for SVCD anyway (2500 VBR = 2500 CBR). However, at 1800 kbit/s and even 1500 kbit/s, CCE performs remarkably better than TMPGEnc.

Regards.

[Sully]

In terms of cost/performance, no there's no comparison. TMPGEnc beats them all. BUT, if you're lucky enough to have a copy of CCE, there is no comparison for SVCD quality.

I started with TMPGEnc, and at the time was satisfied with the results. That is until I came across CCE. Using multi-pass & the correct bitrate calc (like FitCD) & settings (max always 2400) CCE delivers excellent results.

This is just a question of opinion & I'm sure there's many who'll disagree, but as far as I'm concerned it's CCE all the way!!!

[Trenton_Net]

Well, When I use CCE, it seems to produce an odd MPEG2 Video format. When you play it back in Media Player, and you seek to a spot, it fastforwards all the way to it and it takes a long time. Almost the same way Streaming video, or Divx files do.

[Lamont Cranston]

Okay lets quantify the comparison. For those of you who have compared CCE with TMPGenc did you see a $4000 difference?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Lamont Cranston on 2001-09-02 10:39:13 ]</font>

[Sully]

Very true. As much as I praise CCE, there's no way to jusify it's price. As I mentioned, there is no cost/performance comparison. TMPGEnc is FREE!

When it comes to producing very clear, fast & (once you get it down) easy SVCD encodes, then CCE is the better encoder.

Anyone with just the slightest bit of imagination can find a way to get thier own copy of CCE.

Looking for "professional" looking SVCD's, using a reasonably fast (ALL encoding of video takes a long time) encoder which is also good in achieving the desired file size, then CCE is the winner.