No SVCD support. How to improve VCD quality ?

[Kdiddy]

Thanks for the trip down memory lane...but yet again, another post without an once of fact to disprove what I said.

We are talking about the same 1x which again stand for 1(150 sectors per sec)..let stick to the subject, in your other post you mentioned "1- I have two DVD players (Apex 660 and Philips 910). "..so there is no need to bring up VCD players, completely different subject.

"However first generation of DVD players have a maximun speed of 1X. So you cannot exceed this bitrate ( In CBR) never. In VBR you can excced this bitrate for short periods of time because the "Buffer" may help the decoder. So I cannot see how you can increase your cbr bitrate above 1374 and play this Mpeg file in a 1x dvd player"

You are right it can not exceed 1X, and 1x = 2.788 mpbs..last I check 1.374 mbps, is a LESSER number than 2.788 mbps.


So again, I IMPLORE you to come with some factual information, math calculations. web pages, whatever, to demostrate where

A) 1X = 1374 bps
B) You can not easily predict what average bitrate 2 pass VBR with the use of a bitrate calculator.
C) That a 100 min movies with a total bitrate of 1717bps or 1374 bps will fit on a 80 min CD.

Im still waiting on the proof to back these claims?


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Kdiddy on 2001-10-24 21:46:24 ]</font>

[vitualis]

Kdiddy,

I don't want to be involved in this messy thread, but I think I should clarify some points...

I don't quite know what you mean by 1x, but I'm taking it to mean single spin CD.

1x = 75 sectors per second, not 150 as you stated a few times before. 150 sectors per second is obvious 2x.

It is easy to verify. Grab a blank 74min CD-R disc -- put it in a proggy like CloneCD and it will give you the reported total number of sectors. It should be around 333000 sectors. 333000 sectors in 74min = 75 sectors/second.

1x DVD is a different thing to 1x CD. I don't quite know what the equivalence is, but 1x DVD "may" be 2x CD. Thus, even 1x DVD drives should be able to play standard SVCDs (which were designed on a 2x CD drive).

Regards.

_________________
Michael Tam

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: vitualis on 2001-10-25 10:57:06 ]</font>

[Antonio S.]

Vitualis:

If Cd capacity is 700Mb and DVD capacity is 4700Mb (4.7Gb),
running both at 1x should bring 1374 kbps max for the Cd and 9226 kbps max for the DVD. Remember DVD storage capacity (single layer/single sided) is about 7 times larger than CD(in the same area space). That is why the DVD players can run at 1x. Higher speed(2x) is needed for SVCD because you are encoding/decoding at a higher bitrate(2600 kbps)in the same Cd medium.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Antonio S. on 2001-10-25 17:10:42 ]</font>

[Kdiddy]

Antonio S: Again you have yet to come with any hard facts to back your claims...not only are we still waiting to back issues "B" & "C" of my previous post??? are you ignoring these points or have you realized your errors. Listed below are several references to proof that VCD/SVCD/mpeg2/mpeg1 programs streams encoded at bitrates above 1.6 mbps will work just fine on 1X DVD players. The problem with those players that will not play is more of FIRMWARE issue.

"SVCD improves on the VCD spec by allowing MPEG-2 coded video, at 480x480 pixels. The allowable bitrate is variable, and tops out at 2x regular CD speed, at around 2.6 mbit/sec."
http://www.moviebone.com/articles/2001/08/prelinger.html

"SVCDs can be read in any CD-XA compatible CD-ROM drive that runs with at least 2x speed"
http://www.uwasa.fi/~f76998/video/svcd/overview/#playback_options

"Single speed DVD-ROM drives have a data transfer rate of approximately 11 Mb/s, which is equivalent to a 9x CD-ROM drive."
http://www.disctronics.co.uk/btmframe.htm

"DVD-ROM drives became generally available in early 1997 and these early 1x devices were also capable of reading CD-ROM discs at speeds sufficient for full-screen video playback."

[Antonio S.]

Please my friend: Just read your own POST and Articles....

PD- Are you speechless after Vitualis post?

[Kdiddy]

"Just read your own POST and Articles.... "

you tried this line before, please come with something better..and no Im not speechless, he has much credence to what he posted unlike yourself...especially when it comes to "Thus, even 1x DVD drives should be able to play standard SVCDs (which were designed on a 2x CD drive). "
the better question is are YOU speehless when it comes bringing hard evidence to prove me wrong??..so far the answer has been a resounding yes.

[y2flyy]

Okay my dvd player supports vcds and svcds
when i did regular vcds in mpeg format I didnt like the quality
it just what what i was expected in watching a movie
So I started doing svcds in mpeg2 format which looked better but it took an additional 3 hrs to encode and I have a fast computer
so I would not use Svcd that often b/c they take to long for me
so after reading and going over the topic making vcds better
by kdiddy and a few others, I did a little exploring
So what I did was open a Svcd template in Tmpenc and changed
one thing the resolution. I changed it from like 450x450
to 350x350(??) (the regular resolution for a mpeg) and kept the bitrate at svcd format something like 2500
So the good news is it encoded very fast and the quality was great. i guess this is what you call an xvcd. So basically the 450x450 didnt look any better than the 350x350(??) and it takes 4 hrs to encode!! So its the resolution takes that takes so long. But its no difference in the end at the same high bitrate.
Thanks alot it made a big difference for me I learn alot from this forum.

[kidkurrupt]

y2flyy, I am curious to know what your template settings are for your xvcd's that you make?
example: you use standard vcd resolutions, CBR, VBR 2 pass, what bitrate, what filters, etc.?

[y2flyy]

hey kid I'm using the vcd format or mpeg1
using more bitrates like a svcd
and the quality is better than vcd and takes less time than
a svcd
my settings were something like
350x350 resolution and 2500 bitrate
I didnt change anything else
Y2Flyy

[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 2001-10-25 13:47:35, Antonio S. wrote:
Vitualis:

If Cd capacity is 700Mb and DVD capacity is 4700Mb (4.7Gb),
running both at 1x should bring 1374 kbps max for the Cd and 9226 kbps max for the DVD...</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm sorry, but you are mistaken here. As I stated before, a 1x DVD drive does not equal single spin speeds when reading a CD. It is much faster.

As I stated before, I don't know what the equivalence is, but it is AT LEAST 2x CD (for reading a CD) or more -- thus, even a single spin DVD drive should have no problems reading a standard SVCD.

Regards.

[SH0CKER]

I have a Panisonic DVD player model RV-31 and found that it wont play any mpeg2 as well. Although not perfected yet, I've been tinkering and found these setting so far to be the best:

CBR 1900 VBV buffer 0
Highest quality search precision
Sharpen Edge(which can be diffrent depending on sourse)H 127 V 71

GOP 1,5,2,1
CHECK DETECT SCENE CHANGE
DEFAULT QUANTIZE MATRIX
CHECK USE FOLATING POINT..
CHECK NO MOTION SEARCH
CHECK SOFTEN BLOCK NOISE 40, 35

IT TOOK ME ABOUT A MONTH OF MY SPARE TIME TO COME UP WITH THIS AS I TRIED ALOT OF SETTINGS.ANY OTHER TINKERING WHICH MAY HELP PLEASE POST.

[DVD Master]

To Antonio S.

Can you post latest template for VCD with SVCD resolution?

DVD Master

[Greg12]

I have an APEX 660 n it will play most neything.

It will NOT play 640x480. I have tried that.

[Antonio S.]

Greg12 I also have an Apex 660. Do not use 640X480 better use 720x480...

DVD master, my latest template is here http://rilanparty.com/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7291&pagenumber=2

Antonio S.

[sean madison]

ShiZZZoN-
It's time for me to come up in here and get everything straightened out-
These are not only my results of testings but are also facts as well-

If your source file has a res of 352x288, encode at that res. If it is any lower, encode at 352x240.
NEVER,NEVER EVER ENCODE AT A RES HIGHER THAN YOUR SOURCE.
It will make it look like shit. It's like opening wmp and hitting zoom 200%.
Also, 480x480 is way too much widescreen.
If you want awesome clear image quality, read my temp n guide or wait til i come out with my new temp- PzN 1.0m, this temp is for every movie group if u dl movies.

Now, u only encode at 704x480 if your source is 704x480 or larger.
This is just fact.
I dont care if u up the bitrate by 1,000,000.
U cant expect to up the res just like that if the source is smaller.
Let me explain-
Lets say your source is 352x288 and u want 704x480.
The reason why it would not look good even if your bitrate was-
10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000
is that the video was captured for 352x288.
Trying to encode at a higher res is not going to produce good picture quality because their are not enough pixels there to fill in the gaps for the larger res.
Since u had sufficient pixels for 352x240, you will be making gaps for 704x480 or any larger res higher than 352x288.
Bitrate keeps the flow of the pixels that were already there lookin good.
It cant fill the gaps in if it doesnt know what goes in them. You cant make tmpgenc just guess how the video supose to look like in a bigger res.
So you notice if you up the res and play it back on a tv, the picture has slight or moderate blocks in it now.
Why?
TMPGENC is trying to stretch picels in the gaps to try and fix it.
But think about it- if tmpgenc could actually stretch the pixels to fill in the gaps and make it look perfect, you would not need 704x480 or any other res higher than your source because its using existing pixels to fill in gaps that are being stretched.
Stick to your source res.
Oh yea and one more thing-
640x480 just like any other res will play back on my dvd player.
Although only certain res will play back in full screen
640x480 plays in top left corner that takes up only 1\4th of the tv screen.