Bad results when burning...anoying squares?

[spookyloop]

Every time I try to rip a DVD with Mac the ripper the TS folder is fine but things start going bad when I shrink it to 4.4 gigs with either DVD2oneX, Toast or Popcorn.
On the DVD I get this anoying mosaic like square effect, like when you enlarge a video or image and get big pixels (well that's the best way I can explain it).
I would really like to know what causes this so I can prevent it.
I've tried everything. The only times I get good results is when I convert DivX or Xvid to Mpeg-2
with Visualhub (I need to do this because my standalone DVD player doesn't support DivX).
Anyways, if someone can help me I'd apreciate.
Thanks

[jtoolman2000]

It's called Macroblocking and it is a result of compression. Trying to scqeeze a dual layered disk into one single one is a classic situation. The solution is to simply rip the movie without anything else. One audio track as well. That way if you do have to compress it will not be as much as with all the extra crap.

[tomlee59]

Yes, compression involves tradeoffs (otherwise, we could keep compressing until every movie occupied zero file size). As jtoolman suggested, you can reduce the penalty by being selective about what you preserve during the shrink. Get rid of all of the extra features and unneeded language tracks. That will minimize the amount of compression needed to fit onto a single DVD, and therefore minimize the additional degradation the video will suffer. And if you *really* want to keep the extra features, put them on a separate disc. Or spend the money for a dual-layer burner (and good media) and avoid the shrink operation completely.

[lawnman]

He has a Pioneer 112D so he could use DLs if he wants to spend the cash.

[spookyloop]

Thanks...makes sense. One more question; can deinterlacing reduce macroblocking?
I also plan on getting a standalone DVD player that supports DivX.
Will I avoid these problems and get better results compressing with Divx?
Thanks.

[tomlee59]

For the same data rate, DivX can indeed produce better results. So, you can dial down the data rate to reduce file size with less of a quality penalty. h.264 does even better, although its increased complexity means considerably longer encode times.

Interlacing artifacts are totally different from macroblock ones (except that they are both annoying). The former come from legacy TV sources, basically, where each frame actually consists of two half-resolution fields. This hack produces a field rate (a smidge below 60 per second in NTSC) high enough to avoid flicker, without requiring a costly doubling of bandwidth (remember, TV standards were developed in the 1930s, when technology was a lot more primitive). It was a brilliant solution to a tough problem a half-century ago, but it's now a bit of an albatross. You may want to de-interlace if your source is interlaced, but there are right and wrong ways to go about it. See http://www.100fps.com/video_resolution_vs_fluidity.htm for an extended discussion. Also search this forum.

Macroblocking comes from an insufficient data rate. The encoder has basically given up, and says "This is the best I can do with the poor data rate you've forced me to work with." One cure for that is to increase data rate, but at the cost of larger files. Another cure is to use a more advanced codec that is able to produce a higher quality output at a lower data rate.

[spookyloop]

Thanks alot for all the information. This answers my questions and more.
As far as size is concerned I'm not a compression freak. I just want to see and enjoy quality
on my screen, this is what brought me to this forum/site in the first place.
I just want quality DVD burns. Like most of us I try to put as much stuff on disc to clear HD space and thats where the knowledge comes in handy. Videohelp is by far the most complete
site on the subject. Very happy to have found it.

[tomlee59]

Welcome to these forums, spookyloop -- glad to have you join us! There are lots of very helpful, friendly folks here.

And since you are planning to get a DivX-capable DVD player, you've got more flexible options. Personally, I'm a big fan of DivX/XviD, precisely because it offers a nice balance of quality, bitrate, and encode speed. Since personal tastes vary quite a bit, I recommend experimenting with a variety of encode settings (and with a variety of source material -- live action/CG/animation) until you settle on a combination that yields results pleasing to you. I keep a couple DVD RW discs around for exactly this kind of experimentation.

[dizzie]

Loop,

You may also care to look at my recent thread - https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=322613 for additional info. Of course, like you mention, you've gotten a lot of great info on this thread already!!!