I am new encoder in the encoding world using MeGUI. I have encoded 720p 4.36 gb movie compress to 800mb. But there are some small block in the video. Sample image given below-
So, can anyone help me to figure this out. Which filter needed to use to improve the picture quality or suggest me any setting without increasing bit rate.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 30 of 37
Last edited by Baldrick; 19th Feb 2012 at 08:32. Reason: Image too wide, changed to a link instead.
Resize to a lower resolution/frame size if you want to keep it so small(800MB).
the short answer is no, the 4.36gb 720p video was already way over compressed; standard blu-ray sources are typically 20-25 mb/s 1080p at about 20+gb, someone then took that and created a slightly over 4gb 720p video, which resulted in throwing away tons of resolution and detail and you now want to take that same 720p movie and drop it down to 800mb with no artifacts or blocks?
even if you started out with the original blu-ray you wouldn't be able to do that, hell i'm not sure you could do it if you even had the master.
I hate to disagree with Baldrick, but you can definitely make great 720p mp4 or mkv and keep the file size around 800mb. I would definitely stop using megui if that's the best quality you can get. That looks like a VCD from 10 years ago. For converting 1080p bluray to tiny 720p mp4, I go right to Handbrake. Even on 50" screen they look great.
I think,therefore i am a hamster.
Yeah, that's cool Johns0. Many do on this topic, but I think the Matrix 2 qualifies as having some fast action parts, and I have a home made mp4 that tops out at 875mb. I've also recently done Inception and Transformers Dark of the Moon. Those came in around 1gb and look way way better than the cap shown above. It's totally possible.
let's see a sample of your awesome looking fast action scenes on your mind boggling 800mb encodes.......I've got some cell phone booster stickers to sell as well.
No reason to be a dick about it. I very nicely pointed out to the original poster that it is possible. If you just want to insult me, and don't have an interest in actually helping the guy then why don't you shove off?
well cook goldblum, newbies giving newbies bad advice doesn't do anyone any good. there's a reason vcd was 352x240, and it was so at the low vcd bitrate it would be watchable. 720p at those bitrates isn't pretty no matter who or what encodes it.--
"a lot of people are better dead" - prisoner KSC2-303
Chef Goldblum - I also would like to see a clip of your low bitrate encode.
Could you please upload a 15 (approx) second clip ?
I've had some luck my self re-encoding movie trailers, just to see what was possible, re: low bitrates.
However, I never went as low as you have. There is always some trade off; I'd be interested in seeing how yours came out.
p.s. - u mad?
All comes down to what one considers watchable. I tend to encode higher bit rates to future proof playback quality.
Even after the Thailand flood, hard drives are cheap and getting cheaper. The real work is in the encoding. I want to do this once.
For 720p i go for 7k bitrate,enough so i don't see mosaic patterns in dark screens.I think,therefore i am a hamster.
aedipuss - To assume someone has no experience because they are using a new account on "your" website is dumb. I've been working with digital video since 2000 and before that I worked with analog equipment. Who cares if that impresses anyone, I'm just saying that I am not new.
greymalkin - I don't need to get angry, just pointing out that there's no reason to be a dick.
davexnet - I've put some clips up. 2mb or so each and around 15 seconds of 720p footage with the borders clipped. Let's see if you enjoy it, and watch on your TV if you can.
edDV - I'd rather play movies from a server than to swap bluray so these types of rips appeal to me. I am working with 3TB right now and that's the best of my collection. Like you say, there are some trade-offs, and this is somewhat subjective to the eye. Those who want to be totally anal about it (not to say this is you) then watch the bluray. That will give the best quality and to say less is ridiculous. I can put 1000 movies into a TB at this rate which means a lot to me. One a 50" screen sitting on the couch no one has yet to complain about watching a movie at my house. Not a panel of experts but people used to watching hd video.
Last edited by Chef Goldblum; 18th Feb 2012 at 00:37.
I must say, for a bit rate if 1150kbps and a resolution of 1280x532, it looks far better than I thought it would.
However, saying that, the problem you discuss in your first post - does it go away if you raise the bitrate?
I'm not saying you should rasie it; rather, I just don't think you're going to get any better with
the resolution / bitrate you're using.
For 2nd tier 1080i/720p movies or TV series captured TS from cable, after cutting out commercials, I'd use inverse telecine (for 1080i) and constant quality between 18-21.
That usually results in average bit rates between 4 to 8 Mb/s*
This is a typical 22 min sitcom (using Handbrake).
Complete name : V:\7-TV Series\2BrokeG\2 Broke - 111114.mkv
Format : Matroska
File size : 1.16 GiB
Duration : 21mn 31s
Overall bit rate : 7 747 Kbps
Writing application : HandBrake 0.9.5
Writing library : libmkv 0.6.4.1
ID : 1
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : Main@L4.0
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, ReFrames : 4 frames
Format settings, GOP : M=1, N=42
Codec ID : V_MPEG4/ISO/AVC
Duration : 21mn 31s
Bit rate : 7 209 Kbps
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate mode : Variable
Frame rate : 29.970 fps
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Progressive
* When Constant Quality is used, average bit rate will vary by the quality of the source video. The higher the noise and/or the more motion, the higher the resulting bit rate.
Last edited by edDV; 18th Feb 2012 at 02:39.
edDV - I agree. Some people are not satisfied with less than bluray with all the bells and whistles, and I have friends that swear that they can hear the difference between CD and mp3. Most people cannot, and for viewing everyday at a moments notice without flipping through hundreds of discs, this is my solution. I could have gone smaller but this is the point where most people are going to be satisfied with the experience.
I'm including a clip of low bit rate 1080p if anyone is interested in how that can look. This film finished at 1.5GB. Let me know what your opinions are.
Chef Goldblum - I am quite impressed with the video quality you have posted here and think that it would be perfect for the type of application you have described, in consolidating a collection onto a hard drive.
All those videos are way overcompressed. What are you watching them on? A cell phone? They would need twice as much bitrate to even begin to be watchable on a big screen TV.
Last edited by jagabo; 20th Feb 2012 at 07:02.
Very impressive Chef Goldblum.
I have many videos to send to youtube and this quality is perfect for this.
I wonder how can this quality.
Jagabo- Oh, snap! A cell phone! Wait, wait let me write this down... "Need 2x the bit rate to even begin to be watchable...." Do you even have a 50" TV to watch them on? Because, they look pretty damn good even at that size. Anyway, I didn't just plop in the bluray, and compress. I ran numerous tests with varying bit rates, changing resolution vs not, showing to people, etc. These might not be up to your discriminating tastes, and that's fine. This is not meant to exactly replicate viewing a bluray, but to compress HD to a point where the average viewer of HD content, under normal movie viewing circumstances, is satisfied.
Have you compared to the original Blu-Ray? The blockiness is more like upscaled DVD than downscaled Blu-Ray.
As said above, each person has a subjective quality tradeoff vs. file size.
By future-proof, I mean your next HDTVs will reveal far more flaws than you see on current technology. So, even for routine TV caps that I intend to keep, I'd invest more in bit rate using contant quality setting. As for Youtube, they are going to re-encode again so you should be giving them higher quality free of blocks.
Yes, I have compared to the bluray, and the rips are from bluray, not upscaled. The disc is my actual archival copy. Hopefully somewhat future proof! As far as any blockiness goes, it's only noticeable when you're right up on the screen. From a reasonable 5-6 ft viewing distance, on a large tv, it's not noticed.
Anyway my original point here was that it is totally possible to make a great 720p rip of a bluray even at a file size around 800MB. Not one that's blurry, washed out and blocky, but actually watchable and enjoyable. We can debate the pro's and con's, but looking at my clips above I think it's been proven.