LISTEN TO ME!!! F*** TMPEGENC, PANASONIC IS FAR BETTER!!!!

[kwag]

Panasonic encoder is very good, but TMPG is far better. This is NOT a personal opinion. Look at the "blockiness" on panasonic, and you will see it's far more than TMPG.

Also if you look at a still background, on the panasonic mpegs you will see "movement" continuously. The motion estimation is pretty bad on the panasonic.

And as far as DVDx shown on the screenshots, its still a very unstable program because it crashes and does all kind of "audio clicks and pops."

Better off using Flask or Xmpeg and frameserving into TMPG.

[BxB]

So DVDx doesn't even work with the Panasonic encoder using NTSC (at all?). I can't get it to encode more than two frames from any of my DVDs, regardless of the output settings. Pretty lame.

[vitualis]

Let me stress again. Quality is SUBJECTIVE.

Furthermore, looking at still images of a particular video clip is a meaningless exercise, expecially when MPEG-1 at VCD bitrates so lossy.

IMHO, TMPGEnc tends to look sharper than Panasonic, but it is also consistently BLOCKIER than Panasonic. This is when viewed as a video (not a still) on a TV. I personally prefer the softer video of Panasonic as there is less perceptable MPEG artificing.

As someone stated a while back on this thread, neither encoder is probably "better" when it comes to quality of MPEG-1 video at VCD bitrates. They are just "different". Which one is better will depend on your eyes.

@Dhruv: I don't use DVDx, but I would presume (correct me if I'm wrong) that if has in-build MPEG encoding, it would be based on or use bbMPEG. Both TMPGEnc and Panasonic have better video quality than bbMPEG.

Regards.

[kwag]

Well, all i can say, is that I am very happy with my XVCD's at 720X480 @2000Mbps_VBR_MPEG-1 with TMPG version 2.02.

I can't do this with the Panasonic encoder.

I stoped using Panasonic because of the blocks, and the quality of TMPG encoder is extremely good.

You can see in any movie, in transitions from dark to bright and vice-versa, the blocks on the Panasonic.

On TMPG the hardly show. This is of course on the latest version.

If you do a movie with sub-titles with the Panasonic, they are very blurred, as compared to TMPG. Some people refer to this as a "softer" picture, but in reality when you see it in a 60" television, it looks really blurred.

As to DVDx's internal encoder, it's based on code from the MPEG Group.

It's available at http://www.mpeg.org and the quality is really bad on fast motion scenes as compared to TMPG or even Panasonic's encoder.

On stills and medium movement scenes, the quality of the MPEG GROUP's encoder is really great.


The other problem with DVDx is that it is SloooooooWWWWWW.

[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 2001-12-21 21:13:53, kwag wrote:
Well, all i can say, is that I am very happy with my XVCD's at 720X480 @2000Mbps_VBR_MPEG-1 with TMPG version 2.02.</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

That's great for you but the comparison before was at standard VCD settings only. For many people (myself included), at standard VCD settings, Panasonic produces consistently better video output than TMPGEnc.

Regards.

[kwag]

[quote]
On 2001-12-22 03:20:08, vitualis wrote:
<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>

That's great for you but the comparison before was at standard VCD settings only. For many people (myself included), at standard VCD settings, Panasonic produces consistently better video output than TMPGEnc.

Regards.

</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

If you look at a movie produced at standard VCD template by TMPG or with ver. 2.51 of the Panasonic in a large 60" screen or a flat 40"+ plasma display you will see what I mean on the artifacts and blocks produced by the Panasonic.

Also the color correction on the Panasonic is wrong.
The colors don't look natural.

This is viewed on a professional studio monitor of a friend of mine that does broadcast editing and post-productions.
He also uses TMPG, and I really saw the diference.

For a regular home tv, it's hard to distinguish.

[baker]

Dhruv you have been asking a lot of questions and getting no answers sorry about that.

first of all on a 50hrz 32" tele
there is no difference in sharpness between the two encoders. so just imagine tmpegenc with less blocks. And as for speed Panasonic used as a plug-in with dvdx is far faster than frameserving into tmpegenc.

Baker

[baker]

Kwag I notice you are making xvcds and this is why you are seeing worse quailty in your pwi rips then your tmpegenc rips. I agree That if you want to make xvcds than tmpegenc is the way to go. However for standard vcds you can't easily beat Pwi.

Baker,

[kwag]

No Baker!. The quality I am refering to is standard VCD's.

I don't make VCD's any more, because I have now a P4 1.6GHZ
and I can make a 720X480 XVCD movie in about 6 hours.

I used to make regular VCD's before, and that is why I can tell the diference. Panasonic plug-in is more than 3 times slower than TMPG Encoder.

Remember I refer to TMPG version 2.02 that supports SSE-2 instruction set on a P4.

What I do now ( frameserving the actual DVD resolution of 720X480 ) from XMPEG into TMPG takes over 24 hours on a P3 1GHZ!.

But as for quality on a regular VCD, I have seen the comparison on several movies, on a professional broadcast studio monitor and you can really tell the diference between both encoders.

Regards,
kwag

[baker]

well maybe on a moniter but I have a 32" tele and used the warner brothers startup logo for my tests and I really can only tell the difference by the ammount of blocks in tmpegenc.

Baker,

[Dhruv]

Ok thanks Baker! Well I'm more into XVCD than standard VCD so what do you think would be better for that? Most of my XVCDs have a bitrate of around 1800kb/s. Also I've got both plug-in(v.2.00) and standalone version of Panasonic(v.2.51), do you think I should just use the plug-in in DVDx or frameserve to the standalone version? Which one would be quicker?
Sorry for asking so many questions!,

[baker]

Well, panasonic makes a mess of xvcds so don't use it for xvcds. Tmpegenc is better for that. Also, Kwag I am making another test to see about this moving walls you are talking about so I should have a update on this soon.

Baker,

[baker]

Quote:
Kwag:"Also if you look at a still background, on the panasonic mpegs you will see "movement" continuously. The motion estimation is pretty bad on the panasonic."

I done a test trying the two incoders side by side and yes there is visable movent on the roads in panasonic, however this is also there in tmpegenc mpegs.In fact it is worse in tmpegenc,it moves more...

Baker.

[w00kiee]

i have to agree that with lossy video quality is subject to opinion. although there is a comparison list on this site.

in my opinion i say tmpgenc is better. not talking big leaps, just a bit. panasonic is imo blurrier which can be perceived(sp) as good especially since the bluriness covers up some artifacting.. while tmpgenc is clearer and you can see more of the artifacting. i prefer the clarity (since the blockiness is usually over background areas that i would not be focusing on during a scene, while the blurriness affects the entire scene ) and definately cant judge an encoder by a single frame.. gotta check it running full fps on a tv.

tmpgenc gets my nod

wasnt there a bandwidth problem (total data xfered in a months time) just a month ago with vcdhelp.com.. fixed by optimizing images (and compressing text) .. ?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: w00kiee on 2001-12-24 16:25:16 ]</font>

[baker]

Hello w00kiee,

I think you should try panasonic on a tv, You may be suprisied.

Baker

[baker]

Anyone else share there views??

Baker,

[Mr G]

I agree with Vitualis's comments 100 %

Those that say tmpge aint blocky need an eye test, no matter what version, Hell i'm sure it must be sponsored by lego.

Sure its sharper, just pray you don't get any fast action!

Panasonic is soft in comparison but on all the tv's i've viewed my rips on I had no problem with the quality.

This is one of those questions that will go on and on and on........

The answer is..Don't rely on other peoples views, encode the same source material on each encoder and view each on the same player & tv for yourself.

Merry Xmas by the way!


G

[baker]

Well mr.g I just tough you deserved an answer, I havent been to this post in months and soince you posted that at christmas( a few months ago) I am presuming tha you have either laeft vcd, changed name, still here. or

I am crpa with sleep exaustion so must go.....

Baker

[PnutButtRjarZ]

I've been trying to figure this one out myself. I have dvdx 1.6 and the plug-in, but I want to be able to rip the entire movie to the HD first, so I don't mess up my DVD rom. But everytime I try and size up the mb, It reads above half of the movie then gives me a DeCSS out error. Why is this?? Can't you rip the whole movie with dvdx?
I watch all my dvd's thru my tv anyway, so I am interested in making the best vcd to watch thru my tv.

[baker]

Use smart ripper which can be found on the tools section of this site.

Baker