PICVideo MJPEG 16 setting vs 19?

[hiflyact]

I was wondering how much better a 19 setting would be compared to a 16 setting using the PICVideo codec to capture in? The reason I ask is because I am limited to using a 16 setting in order to capture an hour long TV show due to the 4GB limit of Win98. I'm going to upgrade to Windows 2000 so I won't have this restriction on the file sizes anymore.

Thanks

[freestyler]

Upgrading would be a good idea. Depending on the content you're capturing, it may be hard to tell the difference between 16 and 19 without zooming in on some test video / snapshots

-Free

[hiflyact]

Well, I captured some stuff off of analog cable directly into my capture card using a setting of 16 with MJPEG. Encoded it in TMPGEnc using 2 pass VBR and made a SVCD out of it. I watched it on my DVD player and it looks sort of fuzzy in a way, or that the edges of the graphics are ...I don't know what the word is for it. It doesn't look too bad if you're sitting at a distance, but if you get a little closer, it really sticks out. To put it simply, it's not as sharp as it could be and I guess that's due to the 16 setting.

[TerryToonz]

If you capture with PICVideo codec within VirtualDub it will split the files into 4 gig sections which you can then join with the frameserver function and serve to TEMPEnc.
19 is very much better than 16 but not quite as good as Huffy.

[MrKGB]

I see a big difference even between 18 and 19.
You can try to encode using DIVX at about 10mbps, this will give much better quality than MJPEG @ 16 and it will be very small file at the same time. You will need a good PC for this : something like 2 GHz CPU.

[Will Hay]

There is an excellent PicVideo MJPEG settings comparison on this very site, but I'll be buggered if I can find it when I want it
I'll do some digging and report back.
You'll see a decent benefit BTW, as this guide (when I find the bugger!) will demonstrate.
Will

[Will Hay]

Well, I captured some stuff off of analog cable directly into my capture card using a setting of 16 with MJPEG. Encoded it in TMPGEnc using 2 pass VBR and made a SVCD out of it. I watched it on my DVD player and it looks sort of fuzzy in a way, or that the edges of the graphics are ...I don't know what the word is for it. It doesn't look too bad if you're sitting at a distance, but if you get a little closer, it really sticks out. To put it simply, it's not as sharp as it could be and I guess that's due to the 16 setting.

Are you sure this is a result of the quality, or a setting you've incorrectly ticked?
Click here and make sure the 2 lines if more than 240 lines' is unchecked
Report back with how you go on, this 'fuzzyiness' was a a pain for me for weeks until I solved it, Im hoping it'll solve your problems too
Will

[Will Hay]

There is an excellent PicVideo MJPEG settings comparison on this very site, but I'll be buggered if I can find it when I want it

Here it is, click here.
Good luck
Will

[hiflyact]

Thanks for link on the comparision, that was great.

I think the fuzziness was due to the low capture setting of 16. I just upgraded my machine to Windows 2000 so I could obliterate the 4GB file size limit imposed by Windows 98.

I now capture to 480x480 using the setting of 19 with PicVideo's codec and an hour show takes up appox. 9 GB. I take that file, edit commercials out in Vdub and then frameserve to TMPGEnc using a 2 pass VBR method and choose high quality for the motion search estimate.

I'm happy with the results I've attained.

The thing about unchecking the box that says 2 fields if more than 240 lines in the advanced settings, I'm not sure if I should do that or not since I am capturing in 480. I don't understand what that setting does, so I left it checked by default.

[Will Hay]

The thing about unchecking the box that says 2 fields if more than 240 lines in the advanced settings, I'm not sure if I should do that or not since I am capturing in 480. I don't understand what that setting does, so I left it checked by default.

I don't fully understand it either, but I capture at 720 x 576 and my captures improved dramatically when I un-ticked it.
I'd suggest you capture the same footage twice, ticked and un-ticked, and waste a dvd-r disk checking out the results, but if your getting good results now then great
Will

[FulciLives]

I thought the 2 fields if more than 240 should be checked when you capture at resolutions above 240 because 240 is half of 480 (for NTSC otherwise it is 288 for PAL since that is half of 576)

In other words if it is NOT checked and you capture at full D1 resolution then wouldn't you ONLY be getting one field instead of two? In other words this would give a deinterlaced output but at a disadvantage of half the horizontal resolution?

Or am I wrong?

I've been using PICVideo MJPG with the 19 settings and I have the 2 fields if more than 240 item CHECKED ... never tried it UNCHECKED and I always capture at either 720x480 or sometimes 352x480

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[Will Hay]

I thought the 2 fields if more than 240 should be checked when you capture at resolutions above 240 because 240 is half of 480 (for NTSC otherwise it is 288 for PAL since that is half of 576)

In other words if it is NOT checked and you capture at full D1 resolution then wouldn't you ONLY be getting one field instead of two? In other words this would give a deinterlaced output but at a disadvantage of half the horizontal resolution?

Or am I wrong?

Sounds like complete sense to me, but like I say...
....the opposite works for me!
Very strange
Will

[FulciLives]

Will ...

I just tried both with the option UNCHECKED and with it CHECKED and set to 240 lines (since I was capturing NTSC TV) and I didn't see a difference either way.

I was recording THE HULK from Sci-Fi and it was shot on film and either way I had the setting (both checked and unchecked) I saw the typical 3-2 NTSC pattern on the capture.

So you got me !

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[Will Hay]

I just tried both with the option UNCHECKED and with it CHECKED and set to 240 lines (since I was capturing NTSC TV)

I think, and I'm no expert so can't be sure, this might be it (for me, anyway).
Doesn't the UK have a higher TV res, ie/ more lines than the US?
As I'm in England, by checking the box might hinder the capture for this reason
As I say, when I check it I get what I can only describe as a shimmering effect on the slightest movement.
I'm just plucking at straws here, but it could be a factor perhaps.
You think?
Will

[FulciLives]

Will ...

I'm not sure. I should have said that when I did my sample clips both with and without the option checked that I was capturing at 704x480

I think as long as you are capturing at full horizontal resolution (480 for NTSC and 576 for PAL) that it THEN doesn't make a difference what you set it too.

My guess is it only should ... stress should ... come into play when you are capturint 240 for NTSC or 288 for PAL.

So maybe when I get a chace I might try 352x240 or something like that to see what effect it has but the only resolutions I intend to capture too will be "some_number"x480 not "some_number"x240 (I live in the USA so I do mostly NTSC captures although I do have some PAL VHS videos I've been capturing as PAL but I've been using 768x576 25fps for those).

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[DrWafer]

this"2 fields if more than 240 lines" must be checked.

FulciLives is right.

if you uncheck it you simply capture deinterlaced,you miss one every two fields.

we said many times,capture must be always interlaced.