What is a scale factor?

[rocky12]

As I've said several times now, nobody can tell you if those are upscaling or downscaling unless you specify what the source frame size is.

One of my movies is 600MB with no audio another with audio is. 1.64GB. Another is 700MB and so on. All different sizes.

[jagabo]

I give up.

[rocky12]

I give up.

I gave you my sizes. You said it depends on sizes.

[jagabo]

FRAME SIZE not FILE SIZE.

Changing the FRAME SIZE from 720x480 to 480x360 is DOWNSCALING.
Changing the FRAME SIZE from 720x480 to 1024x768 is UPSCALING.

[rocky12]

FRAME SIZE not FILE SIZE.

Changing the FRAME SIZE from 720x480 to 480x360 is DOWNSCALING.
Changing the FRAME SIZE from 720x480 to 1024x768 is UPSCALING.

Oh ok..


One of my movies is 640x352 at NTSC 16:9 so I change it to 854x480. Upscaling? I think I get it now.

Another is 720x404 at PAL 16:9 and size to 720x400. downscaling?

[manono]

I'm with Midzuki. 34 (35 now) posts in this pointless thread. Just stop humoring this person. Either he's terminally stupid or he's a troll.

[guns1inger]

Why are you changing them at all ? You gain nothing, and you lose quality (twice - once for the resize, once for the re-encode). This is on top of the fact they are over compressed, medium quality files to begin with.

[jagabo]

One of my movies is 640x352 at NTSC 16:9 so I change it to 854x480. Upscaling? I think I get it now.

Yes.

But upscaling will not make the video look better. Upscaling will not restore or add any detail. Any time you scale digital video the quality decreases. Any time you reencode with lossy codecs like Divx/Xvid the quality decreases. You will also find that most set-top Divx/DVD players will not play anything with a width over 720 pixels or a height over 576 pixels. So you will end up with a video that occupies more drive space, looks worse, and will only play on a computer.

[rocky12]

One of my movies is 640x352 at NTSC 16:9 so I change it to 854x480. Upscaling? I think I get it now.

Yes.

But upscaling will not make the video look better. Upscaling will not restore or add any detail. Any time you scale digital video the quality decreases. Any time you reencode with lossy codecs like Divx/Xvid the quality decreases. You will also find that most set-top Divx/DVD players will not play anything with a width over 720 pixels or a height over 576 pixels. So you will end up with a video that occupies more drive space, looks worse, and will only play on a computer.

So 720x768 won't playback for PAL 4:3? So I just use 720x400 instead?

[jagabo]

First note that 720x768 was a typo on guns1inger's part. He should have type 768x576. Note that 576 * 4 / 3 = 768 -- hence a 4:3 ratio.

720x768 or 768x576 will not play on most Divx/DVD players. In the first case 768 is too tall (more than 576). In the second 768 is too wide (more than 720). Some older player might attempt to play the video but give a garbled picture. Most newer players will just give an error message.

[guns1inger]

It will, but that isn't the point.

The point is you will actually get a lower quality image by making it larger and re-encoding.

The point is you are wasting your time do what you are doing.

The point is your player will do a much better job scaling up to the correct resolution and aspect ratio on the fly than you will in software.

[45tripp]

I'm with Midzuki. 34 (35 now) posts in this pointless thread. Just stop humoring this person. Either he's terminally stupid or he's a troll.

i say no2
php111

[jagabo]

your player will do a much better job scaling up to the correct resolution and aspect ratio on the fly than you will in software.

I disagree with that last point. Most players will not do a better job of resizing than say a LanczosResize in software. But if you resize and reencode the loss in quality is permanent. If you simply play the original and let the player do the scaling you don't lose anything to reencoding and the player's loss in quality from resizing is temporary. In the future, as better resizing techniques are developed, you will see better quality from players and you won't have screwed up your original.

[rocky12]

It will, but that isn't the point.

The point is you will actually get a lower quality image by making it larger and re-encoding.

The point is you are wasting your time do what you are doing.

The point is your player will do a much better job scaling up to the correct resolution and aspect ratio on the fly than you will in software.

I like to re-encode.

I am not even going to pay attention to losers. I am doing fine learning the aspect ratio and resolutions.

[jagabo]

You may like to reencode but you will be losing image quality by resizing and reencoding.

[CWR03]

This is like saying "My size 10 shoes don't fit right. Should I go to size 11 or size 9 to get a better fit?" I ask "Are the size 10 too tight or too loose?" Your reply "Will size 9 fit better? Will size 11 fit better?" How the hell should I know without some frame of reference?

[guns1inger]

It's more like saying my size 10 shoes fit just right, but I want to wear size 11 shoes for the hell of it. I don't care if they are right or not.

[rocky12]

Hey guns,

I just read both replies this morning but am replying now. So what your guys are saying no one knows how the resolutions are until I try them? Oh about the shoe sizes. I take bigger then size 10 and 11. Lol, I take size 12. Well probably could fit into maybe a 12 1/2 but not sure. 13 would be big and 11 would be small.