How the #/?"!¤/ do they get such quality??

[branch]

An friend just bought a commercially made VCD (in taiwan) and it left me almost breathless - the quality was FANTASTIC - I moved right up to the screen to get a closer look

So I wonder, how the hell do they manage to get such good quality? Do any of you know the specifics? Yeah, they have more expensive hardware/software - but how, what, where?

[shochan]

I think they straight convert it from film to vcd as we now go, film to dvd to vcd loosing quality twice ass opposed to once.

[dumwaldo]

use filters

experiment with encoding techniques

expect very long encoding times

most people just are not willing to invest the time it takes to create a decent mpg file to create a vcd.

personally i am getting very close to the quality i am looking for but it also takes 14 times real time to encode my mpg files from a huffy codec avi capture. thats a far cry from the 1.5 times real time a default template with no filters takes but there is a dramatic difference in quality.

peace out,
dumwaldo

[vhelp]

well, for one, I think it's :
* the source they use (DVD or else the actuall film itself)
* yes, besides the $$$ hardware/software they have/use, it's
most likly that of the Algoritym/effecincy they use in the software
encoding part. The MPEG is the same, but the algorithm is more
effeciant.

CCE, TMPG, Pan are all good encoders, but they lack this type
of aggresiveness. My guess, is there is some sort of qualtiy
control going on here. Cause, if you had such a great encoder
app floating around, producing great looking VCD over DVDs, you'd
have a conflict of something going on. Not that VCDs are better
than DVDs - cause they aren't!! But getting very good results
out of them would only hinder the DVD market. So, what do they
do? Simple, stop dead in its track with VCD effectiveness, and
only give out a handfull to those in the VCD market area.
Well, something like that above is my consp. You said it. The
quality was great. I know it can be. I've done a few pretty
good one myself, and from DVD source, and using TMPG. But there
are better encoders out there for VCD creation. We (You and I)
just haven't seen them yet. And, in countries like taiwan, and
China, etc., they have access to this tech. But if DVD is going
to be (or is the) best/next best thing, you can't have VCD
standing in the way, can you? So, they sort of push it asside,
sort of. Well, that and the security issues of duplicating them
so easily.

Welp, that my thought on VCD quality issues.

[damnim]

Comercial VCD and SVCD productions use a very expensive "hardware Encoder" that is vastly superior to software encoders.

Out of your own curiosity check the prices of some of these mgeg cards.

[rrwmc]

I've noticed the same here in Thailand with the VCD producer "CVD International". Excellent quality throughout. I usually start with miniDV source material and encode overnight with TMPGEnc at 4-8 times realtime kind of quality but can never achieve the same level as these guys. I think the secrets are in the tweaking. I reckon TMPGEnc could get pretty close if only I understood all those variables well enough!

Would someone from "CVD International" like to share your industry secrets?! - Rod

[Bullworth]

You get what you pay for. A hardware encoder that costs several thousand is going to give much better results that a software encoder that is only $100 or free. In some cases all they do is create a master print and use that to physically stamp the CDs. Since there is only one level of compression much less gets lost. Our only hope right now is to wait for DVD burners to have a standard and the prices to come down so we can make nearly exact "backups."

[biffos]

Hey! who cares that are's are not that great a quality, there cheap all you need is a burner and some free software and your away.
I cant afford a DVD recorder and till I can I will make my own VCD and SVCD with all there probs of grain and blockiness, what a great hobby!

ENJOY WATCHING ,NOT SPOTTING.

[dumwaldo]

ok i feel the need to say this again in a more clear way

the software you use is does not have any dramatic effect on quality

hardware acceleration does not effect quality

the only things those will effect is your encoding time. its not some magical MPG encoder only used by professionals, and it is not some super high end equipment that creates good looking VCD's. it is an understanding of how filters and encoding methods can effect outcome that allows these professionals to tweak the settings to create outstanding VCD's. you dont really think that professionals just use default templates do you?

if you have seen a certain quality level in a retail VCD then you too can achieve that quality level. for those of you that still dont believe me i have this test for you to do so you can see the results with your own eyes.

take a one minute clip in the most raw format you have. now encode it to VCD using your usual method for TMPGEnc. now click on settings and go to the advanced tab. check off the filter for noise reduction, and then double click the filter name to get the configuration box. in the noise reduction configuration box enable high quality mode and set range to 2 and set still picture to 50. now encode your file again with a new name.

when you are done look at the two videos, if you dont see an improvment in quality just from using that one filter then feel free to come back and tell me i am full of shit.

filters are just one way to improve quality. i have not tried everything personally but some of the suggestions i have seen are filters, encoding audio and video seperatley, filtering with VirtualDub before encoding to MPG, and frame serving.

think about it this way... i use the full professional version of M$ Front Page to compose websites but i still know people that can compose better websites using notepad. why is that? its because they have a better understanding of how things work than i do. the same can be said for encoders that produce retail VCD's. its not that they have better software or hardware it is that they have better knowledge and understanding.

peace out,
dumwaldo

PS
please save this thread so that i will not have to repost it when DVD recorders come down to a more realistic price level and people start realizing that bitrate and resolution still will not clean up a poor encode.

[damnim]

dumwaldo

the software you use is does not have any dramatic effect on quality

This is not a factual statement. Poorly written software will not produce good results no matter how you

tweak the settings

This is not a factual statement either

hardware acceleration does not effect quality

Hardware mpeg encoders can do what software cannot. I suggest you research this statement out more carefully.

they have a better understanding of how things work

I can know everything there is to know about building a computer but without the proper tools I will not achieve the desired results. 8)

[rrwmc]

Great post Dumwaldo,
I appreciated the effort you went to. It makes sense to me and I'll be trying some of your suggestions.

How do you use filters in VirtualDub before encoding?

[vhelp]

domwaldo, and others. . .

Filters only? Hogwash!

in shorts, it's this way:
-------------------------
* Encoder (softare/hardware)
* Encoder's "algorithem"
* then filters if any R needed

If your source is GIGO, then even the above will not prove
much. So, basically, based on good source materials, the
above is how I see approach to quality VCD/SVCs, etc.

-vhelp

[Branroyal]

Remember friends... the softer the source picture, the better the resulting mpg. Encoding from DVD's mpeg2 file is compressing a compressed file! what you have to do is understand and know where "source" material come from. beta analoge tape is used in hollywood, even when transfer to mpeg2! 720x480 add interlacing to whats an original "laserdisc quality" beta tape resolution. mpeg2 (when encoded right) can keep and with interlacing, preserve the rich look of the studio master.beta tape is a progressive 24 fps ntsc source. this is then "boosted" when put to DVD. i personally have video delivered to me in DV tape format. DV tape is the new standard for video delivery in the industry. DV from beta is a cleaner source than beta to mpeg2 dvd. mpeg2 still add noise to the picture, its not noticable as mpeg1, but its there.. look closely. use vdub and use the smart deinterlace first. second filter to use is smart resize to 352x240, soften the picture up and boost the red, blue, green color enhancement by 6, frame serve to tmpgenc, then use your fav preset and boost soften block noise by 100 on both boxes (take motion search off). take the audio and use soundforge, or your favorate audio mastering software and compress and rms limit the living hell out the audio and encode it with your video. i own many "pro" vcds and i can say you can beat theirs if you get the proper source and perfect your encoding method

Will Smash
CEO/President
Consumer Surround Sound Inc.
CS2CD
www.CS2.biz

[vhelp]

dumwaldo,

Ok, I took your challenge and tried it out. And the following are my
conclusion/reslts:

* Source: DVD "Dogma"
* Encoder: TMPG
* MPEG: VCD
* Filters, [x] Noise Reduction, 50.2.20.[x]HighQlty
* Timed: way toooooooo long (not worth it next time [39+min. for 2000 frms])
* Quality:
ie #1, a perosn's face who has the morning look, this filter will
just about wipe all way,
ie #2, Some pimples on person's face is no longer there**
ie #3, on a winter hat, it looks fake, like you can't see the puffs and knots
etc.

My thoughts are. . .
* this is just some of what I noticed with just a hint of small values
used in this filter alone.
* I would never use this filter, especially cause of it's way tooooo long
processing time alone, unless I really needed to use it, highly unlikely,
for VHS purposes maybe, but I don't think so.
* this was just on the "[x] Noise Reduction" filter.
* I'm not much of a filter user (those that are clean up filters)
* I use color filters, interlace, etc. mostly.

-vhelp

** not that you wanna see pimples

[dumwaldo]

damnim, i noticed you conveniently did not quote my final statement where i state that the only difference those factors make is speed and i maintain that the only thing those effect is speed. you are however correct about the poorly written software and i should have worded that differently. it is misleading. what i should have said is 'using some high end professional software package over TMPGEnc does not have a dramatic effect on quality'. sorry for the confusion, looking back now i see that thought came out in a very misleading manner and that was not my intent.


vhelp, i dont care what your source is. good, bad or inbetween it doesnt matter. if you think you can get quality results from any encode using just default settings you are stroking yourself. i will freely admit i do not work with DVD files but i do capture huffy and uncompressed avi files and i know what the result of a re-encode to VCD looks like with no filters and i know what it looks like with filters. the bottom line is if you want quality dont expect click and burn ease of use. garbage in garbage out is true but if you dont use filters encoding VCD files it may as well be Gold in garbage out.


rrwmc, thanks for the nice words. what i was suggesting with the VirtualDub comment about before encoding to VCD was to encode an extra level of avi file. some people think that the filters in VirtualDub work better than the filters in TMPGEnc. so it would be avi->avi->mpg. the benefit of effective VirtualDub filters can easily negate any detriment from the extra encoding. it is true that you will lose information each time you re-encode a file that is only digital technicality. it is entirley possible to lose some information based on mathmatical facts but manipulate the remaining information in a way that it looks better to your eye.

your eye is nowhere neer as discerning as a computer. where a computer can measure actual bits of data and tell you you lost information your eye can not do the same. your eye will believe what it sees and even if by all facts of math it is less information

peace out,
dumwaldo

[bilbogod]

not that you wanna see pimples

That depends on whether they are on a mans face or a womans bottom

[dumwaldo]

vhelp that last post was to reply to your post before last now this post is to reply to your last post so you dont think my last post was a reply to your last post

from your reply what i got was you confirm that the use of filters can have a dramatic effect. you saw what happened from one filter, now if you had added a sharpen filter and done some color correction you could have saved the pimples.

also

you dont want to use these filters because they make your encode take to long. so just like i said before you can get the quality that the pro's get if your willing to invest the time to do a proper encode.

peace out,
dumwaldo

[alucard2050]

my 2 cents- i have tried makeing a vcd with NO filters. basically click and burn. the quality was in my opinion bad but not bad enough to were it wasn't enjoyable to watch. useing filters has made my vcd's fantastic. yes it does take a much longer time but for me its worth the effort. i just encode segments overnight freeing my pc during the day. as far as manufactured vcd's from company's. i have yet to actually see one. my imagination tells me that they are standard vcd's 1150 bitrate 352x240 or 288. i would think that they would have some kind of professional encoders with top of the line filters. i don't know their specs so i can't be sure. i have viewed on my pc a commercial vcd clip(about 10 seconds) and i wasn't overly impressed. i at the time thought to myself,"Damn, i can do better than that". but that was only one impression. i guess i'll have to get a commercial vcd and see for myself....

[Anonymous65]

In addition to using a very good software or hardware encoder with good filtering, the source material is the most important factor. The source needs to be completely clean, with no random noise. Also, the source will be of much higer resolution, like 704x480 (NTSC) and not 352x240. I have several commercial VCD's, and the quality differs greatly. However, the best VCD's looks just as good or better than a regular VHS video tape. The trick is reducing the noise to zero, and removing any detail the eye will normally not see.