MPEG2 Encoder test

[Edmund Blackadder]

How about frame rate? Strike two for PAL DV.

You asked for it:

First read my previous post, then:

One more strike against NTSC: IRE levels, in other words constant problems with black level bug depending on eqipment. No such issues in PAL.

Hmmm, let me think, oh here's one more: Drop- and Non-Drop Frame time code - big pain in the ss. No such issues in PAL.

NTSC may win the popular vote, but it doesn't make it a good video format. Just like with the presidential election...

[BJ_M]

1. i like PAL also --- except the frame rate
you get used to it though ...

2. in a theater, yes it is 24fps, but a two bladed shutter is used , so its quasi 48 fps -- many people don't realize this.. some projectors use a double speed single blade and there are also 3 blade shutters. We use higher true film fps in our theaters (30fps - 60 fps).
Some crap cinema projectors flicker a lot - yes ..

HD 24fps with added pulldown is displayed on HDTV's at 23.976 progressive, the pulldown is removed. In my opinion, HD standard should have been 30fps... looks a lot better. The HD we pump out is 30 fps progressive mostly quite a diff...

[Edmund Blackadder]

2. in a theater, yes it is 24fps, but a two bladed shutter is used , so its quasi 48 fps -- many people don't realize this.. some projectors use a double speed single blade and there are also 3 blade shutters. We use higher true film fps in our theaters (30fps - 60 fps).
Some crap cinema projectors flicker a lot - yes ..

BJ_M, yes I realize about it actually being 48fps in movie theaters. However, PAL is also near that number because of 50 fields per second. Therefore, in any half decent theater (United Artists, Regal, etc.), on brights scenes of the film, the flicker frequency pretty much feels like PAL's. Of course now they have digital projectors for commercials and while the flicker is no longer there and the picture is very clean and sharp, it just doesn't have the feel of a motion picture, of real 35mm film. I guess, it's just like comparing LP's to CD's - CD's really are superior to LP's, but LP's give that distinct flavor to the sound that pleases many people. I think the photo-film is pretty much giving something similar - its imperfections together with its advantages is what's so cool about it.

HD 24fps with added pulldown is displayed on HDTV's at 23.976 progressive, the pulldown is removed. In my opinion, HD standard should have been 30fps... looks a lot better. The HD we pump out is 30 fps progressive mostly quite a diff...

Perhaps you're right, but in all the times over the recent years that I've seen HDTV's showing film-based material, be that in BestBuy, CircuitCity, Tweeter, DVExpo or wherever, the pulldown worked nicely, the interlacing lines were gone, the pulldown jerkiness didn't seem to show, but still the refresh rate of the TV did not feel like 23.976 (x2), it was still going at the NTSC's rate - 29.97fps (x2). There was no PAL-like/Film-like flicker. So, it's probably not true 23.976 if there was no flicker. The Panasonic TH-42PWD6UY plasma, that I mentioned earlier, does fantastic deinterlacing and pulldown for the NTSC film-based DVD's (I actually turn off Progressive output on the DVD player, because TH-42PWD6UY does a better job with Progressive processing than a DVD player), but it still shows no signs of refresh rate flicker, meaning it still goes at 29.97fps (same exact refresh rate feel as those true HDTV 23.976 demonstrations). PAL film-based DVD's do have flicker on TH-42PWD6UY, so my guess is that whether it's HDTV or EDTV or whatever esle, there is no way of seeing true 24fps (or 48 fields per second) in NTSC land. Further guess is that even if the material is indeed recreated as to be showing 23.976fps (or 47.952 fields per second), it's still being tailored to NTSC's refresh rate of 29.97fps (59.94 fields). Just like watching TGPO's 15fps Kung-Fu on 85Hz refresh rate computer monitor . So it's more like frame rate vs. refresh rate. PAL on the other hand always seems to match frame rate to refresh rate - it's always 25/50. Unless of course you have a 100Hz TV. Even then, it's pretty much straight forward calculations 25 x 2 = 50, 50 x 2 = 100, etc. On the other hand 23.976 and 29.97 and other NTSC frequencies simply seem to be asking for trouble.

I hope that makes it a little more clear as to what I was trying to say. I know it's going out of topic, but any more suggestions/guesses/clarifications?

P.S.: I realize that all those "fields per second" numbers I was talking about in progressive world would become full frames. Though they'd still essentially play the role of the fields in interlaced world - simply to increase the refresh rate. Of course I could be wrong...

[BJ_M]

i don't feel like typing the whys of some HD play back appearance .. we are pretty close in opinion anyway -- :

dropframe/NDF is indeed a royal pain in the ass..

IRE levels are not to bad to deal with ..

[hrlslcbr]

BJ_M:
I have always thought that HDTV's could not display video with a refresh rate of 23.976, like DVD's for example; they have 23.976 fps internally, but I have always read that the video is refreshed at 54.94 full frames per second, and not 23.976 or 47.952 fps... can you please tell me if there are HDTV's that can indeed play videos using a refresh rate of 23.976 or 47.952? (Yes, I AM a newbie in this matter... )

[BJ_M]

video projectors anyway - at least the ones i use ..

[SatStorm]

SECAM. The best system ever

(hi hi hi hi hi hi hi hi hi)

[racer-x]

Excellent work, BJ_M. Even though this is an old post, I just came across it today. I downloaded your clip and tried it out on Main Concept. I don't know what DV codec you used, but Main Concept doesn't like it. It encoded it @ 5x RT, it normally encodes @ 1.7x RT on my old AMD XP 1700. I wonder if the codec effected the output Quality.

Nice transition from map image to ships image. Definetly a workout for any encoder. All encoders are compromisers and I believe what won out on one frame, may not win out on another frame.

Now to add more fuel to the fire. I took a frame grab comparison of two encoders on my system. The source video is a 3D animation rendered in Uncompressed RGB (720 x 480). They were fed directly to both encoders, without using frame servers or filters. Both were encoded with 1-pass VBR @ 8500 high, 6000 avg. I cropped to accentuate the differences. I also encluded a frame grab of the uncompressed RGB for reference.

Procoder - 2


Main Concept 1.4.2


Source - uncompressed RGB


As you can see, Procoder had a very hard time on the flipping page. Main Concept is virtualy indistingwishable from the source.

In all fairness, Procoder does a good job of all the other frames, just not this one. On the other side of the coin, Main Concept does a great job with all frames. Of course they both look great when played.

I don't think anyone can really judge an encoder by one frame, but it's great to look at.

[Edmund Blackadder]

SECAM. The best system ever

Actually, I like SECAM. At least a D/K variation of it. SECAM got that unique look to the picture, different to both PAL and NTSC. Of course on the flip side, the recordings made in LP mode on VHS MESECAM look terrible because of weird moving color bands. But PAL VHS doesn't have that problem.

Capturing SECAM is another challenge as there are not that many cards and boxes that can do it in color. I like miroVIDEO DC30+ for capturing SECAM into PAL files. And now I have a multi-system Toshiba D-R1 DVD recorder and I can capture original high quality SECAM broadcasts into sparkling PAL DVD's! :P

[Sillyname]

Any chance of running Mainconcept 2-pass? Mediastudio Pro just implemented 2-pass encoding. Does Premiere let you do a 2-pass with its version of Mainconcept?

[J. Baker]

I have been doing my own MPEG2 encoder test myself but with an animation I made in flash then converted to an avi. I tested three encoders so far and they are: CCE Basic 2.69 Demo, TMPGEnc 2.5 Demo and ProCoder 1.25 Demo. I set them all as 2 PASS @ 9000 max and 6000 Average. The download is 20mb if you would like to see the results. If anyone has tips on encoding 2D animation to DVD, that would be great.

Download Results Here

Oh and the frame rate is not 29.97, it's at 10.

[BJ_M]

Any chance of running Mainconcept 2-pass? Mediastudio Pro just implemented 2-pass encoding. Does Premiere let you do a 2-pass with its version of Mainconcept?

the main concept tests were at both 2 pass and 1 pass and are marked

[BJ_M]

I have been doing my own MPEG2 encoder test myself but with an animation I made in flash then converted to an avi. I tested three encoders so far and they are: CCE Basic 2.69 Demo, TMPGEnc 2.5 Demo and ProCoder 1.25 Demo. I set them all as 2 PASS @ 9000 max and 6000 Average. The download is 20mb if you would like to see the results. If anyone has tips on encoding 2D animation to DVD, that would be great.

Download Results Here

Oh and the frame rate is not 29.97, it's at 10.

CCE Basic 2.69 Demo, TMPGEnc 2.5 Demo and ProCoder 1.25 Demo are all old products and no longer demo products for some time .. specially procoder 1.25 , that is really old ..


computer animation is not a very good test for mpeg encoding if it is cartoon type animation , its particle effects with gradients that are the torture tests ..

[noki]

Just when I was about to jump on Procoder bandwagon, it did some thing very strange. I encoded a 40-minute analog capture last night and found out that Procoder produced several garbage frames. I say garbage because that's what they are, hardly viewable and everything was screwed up in the frame. I checked the source frames and they looked all right.

had the same problem last week. but then I am using an older version (1.02 I think). also this was encoding a MPEG2 to Quicktime. Went back to using Cleaner. Reason for using PC in the first place was the audio portion of the video sounded better than Cleaner's (using same codec).

[J. Baker]

I have been doing my own MPEG2 encoder test myself but with an animation I made in flash then converted to an avi. I tested three encoders so far and they are: CCE Basic 2.69 Demo, TMPGEnc 2.5 Demo and ProCoder 1.25 Demo. I set them all as 2 PASS @ 9000 max and 6000 Average. The download is 20mb if you would like to see the results. If anyone has tips on encoding 2D animation to DVD, that would be great.

Download Results Here

Oh and the frame rate is not 29.97, it's at 10.

CCE Basic 2.69 Demo, TMPGEnc 2.5 Demo and ProCoder 1.25 Demo are all old products and no longer demo products for some time .. specially procoder 1.25 , that is really old ..


computer animation is not a very good test for mpeg encoding if it is cartoon type animation , its particle effects with gradients that are the torture tests ..

Hmmm... I just downloaded these demos last week. If this is true then the makers of these programs need to update there demos because I don't buy until I've tried the latest version.

As for testing mpeg with 2D animation... I know it's not the best for it but I do believe it's good to test it with. It really shows which of the encoders has the most flaws. Everything you don't see in a regular movie that shows up in a 2D computer animation is taking the detail away from your regular movie. That's why I'm testing it this way.

[BJ_M]

procoder has been on version 2 for about 6 months - they dont sell version 1.5 any more . 1.25 is about 2 years old .. i looked at the canopus web site and they dont have a demo for procoder anyway ..

cce is 2.7 now , 2.7 has huge changes in it -- it really should be called 3.0

tmpgenc is 3 for the pro version .... 2.59 is the free version ...

[monzie]

Just a quick note, but don't film projectors actually STOP the film for a 24th of a second (going basic here), unlike TV which has to draw/scan across the TV (or monitor) screen losing TIME because of the scanning lines..plus of course the little BUT NOT INCONSIDERABLE fact of interlaced FIELDS?

Which leads to a BIG difference between TV and FILM frame rates due to the fact that each frame of a 'celluoid' movie is TRULY projected onto a screen 'all in one go' as opposed to a TV's NOT IN ONE GO due to scanning/interlace fields and therefore TIME?

TV and pc 'pictures' are a nothing but a trick of the eye....argue as much as you want but thats the truth. Film pictures are also a trick, but not quite as much.....(no lingering phosphors to fool the brain).

[DVWannaB]

very good topic of discussion and comments. very informative.

just a quick question on tmpgenc GOP structure and configuration. The NTSC DVD setting default is 1-5-2 (IBP) and 18 MAX number of frames. On lordsmurf's website he recommends a GOP of 1-3-2 (IBP) and 15 MAX GOP. First, will this settting allow for playback on all DVD players? second, what does tweaking to this setting do for me? I am wondering if these knds of tweaks make a difference in the results from the encoder tests.

thanks.

[SatStorm]

Less GOP stracture no problem.
NTSC can be 18 max, PAL 15 max for 100% combatibility.
Many (if not most) DVD standalones don't care about this DVD specifics limitation

[BJ_M]

Less GOP stracture no problem.
NTSC can be 18 max, PAL 15 max for 100% combatibility.
Many (if not most) DVD standalones don't care about this DVD specifics limitation

it true -- many players dont care about specs to much , some will play high bit rate and some non standard gop .... but not all players of course..

[jorel]

[jorel]

as nobody answer the question was removed!
thanks!

[State Of Mind]

Ok, but i think CCE kept more detail, so it was number 2 for my eyes.

That's because noise makes video look "sharp" and therefore makes it look as if detail was efficiently preserved. Also, take into consideration that the more noise there is, the harder it is for the encoder to accurately determine how it should do its own job at encoding the video in general. Some people like to use what we call "filters" to "enhance" video if deemed necessary. I'd rather remove noise, and add in a sharpening filter with none other than the excellent AviSynth! Cheers.

[fmctm1sw]

I'd rather remove noise, and add in a sharpening filter with none other than the excellent AviSynth! Cheers.

That is something I always struggled with. I could never seem to remove noise without removing detail. I started using the DNR in my VCR though, I guess I kind of broke down....

[State Of Mind]

You cannot remove noise without removing detail. That's why you use a sharpening filter (a very efficient one) to compensate. The best way is to not have noise in your source video. I am the pickiest guy in the world about quality and the various things that effect it, but sometimes you just have to face the facts. I had to.

[FredThompson]

So, to conclude, FredThompson you're wrong. PAL is better than NTSC, be that DV, DVD or any other Standard Definition format. Get yourself a quality PAL equipment and see for yourself (no PAL->NTSC converters please).
And the last, a lot of North Americans - (I witnessed it myself, while demonstrating PAL recordings) - when they see PAL for the first time in their lives, they think that it's actually a Hi-Definition signal

Pretty full of yourself, aren't you?

Perhaps you could tell me what equipment and which formats I have. No? I didn't think so.

Again, frame rate is better with NTSC. Your continual assumption that all source starts with film is ludicrous. Shoot PAL and NTSC of the same live action source. Which better represents motion? NTSC. Why? Frame rate.

[Edmund Blackadder]

So, to conclude, FredThompson you're wrong. PAL is better than NTSC, be that DV, DVD or any other Standard Definition format. Get yourself a quality PAL equipment and see for yourself (no PAL->NTSC converters please).
And the last, a lot of North Americans - (I witnessed it myself, while demonstrating PAL recordings) - when they see PAL for the first time in their lives, they think that it's actually a Hi-Definition signal

Pretty full of yourself, aren't you?

Fred, what are you doing in this thread after over a month of silence ? I guess my correct statements are still biting you in the arse, and you just can't surrender to the truth.

Perhaps you could tell me what equipment and which formats I have. No? I didn't think so.

Obviously you've got a crappy equipment if you cannot see that PAL is visually better than NTSC. Why should I even bother to ask you about it. I've actually seen a couple of multi-system TV's that displayed PAL/SECAM much worse than NTSC, because they were tuned for the NTSC land. However, on quality TV sets the difference is striking.

Again, frame rate is better with NTSC. Your continual assumption that all source starts with film is ludicrous. Shoot PAL and NTSC of the same live action source. Which better represents motion? NTSC. Why? Frame rate.

Where the hell did you come up with the idea of me thinking that all the sources start with film??? You shouldn't be drinking too much . And as for frame rate, just as with fast shutter speeds (above 100), I find the motion that is way too clear highly annoying and busy looking. NTSC motion (60i) is somewhere in between normal and annoying. PAL to me at 50i is just perfect. More isn't always better Fred (60i vs 50i), except of course when it comes to the resolution (satisfactory 576 vs crappy 480) . And, if you read my previous posts, I did compare the same shots made on the same (VX1000E/VX1000) or very similar (TRV900E/PD150) PAL and NTSC cameras and PAL cameras always came out on top when it came to picture quality. So when you get sober, please read this thread from the beginning. Oh, and when I get my hands on upcoming Sony HVR-Z1 50i/60i/1080i/PAL/NTSC HDV camcorder, I will still shoot mostly in 50i for the material that matters to me personally, even though the HD resolution will be the same for both 50i and 60i. Only when I do local business projects will I do 60i.

So what else do you got to say in your self defence Fred? Just remember, you're not going to win this argument.

P.S.: Just to stay on topic, ProCoder 1.5 is still the best DV to MPEG2 encoder.

[FredThompson]

Thanks for proving my points. Predictable.

[Edmund Blackadder]

Thanks for proving my points. Predictable.

You're welcome. The truth is predictable, unless you live in denial. And now you may start reading this thread from the beginning. Good night!

P.S.: If you'd like to post the list of your equipment please do so, including the camera models, TV's and types of connections. If you want to try to prove your point you've got to present a little more than what you've shown us so far.

[State Of Mind]

P.S.: Just to stay on topic, ProCoder 1.5 is still the best DV to MPEG2 encoder.

That's debatable. I think you're both full of yourselves. :P