Problems with H.264 conversion

[kinoman5]

Hello forum. I was just wondering if you could help me out here. So I have a .mkv file, it's a polish movie. No conversion program would accept it. I tried sony vegas, 4media, avs, etc. Each program stated that the file was missing. It works when I just play it so it's not a problem with the file itself. I ran it through mkvmerge and 3 files came out. The audio file (.dts format,polish), the video file (.h264, polish), and the subtitles (.srt, polish). I tried some programs that convert h264 files, to no avail. I tried to see if the programs would recognize any of the three files, and again nothing. So now I am stuck, and I have no clue what to do. Could it be the problem with a PAL region (which I don't know if it is actually PAL or not ), or is it simply the file extension.
Please help. Any advice will be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

[poisondeathray]

What are you trying to convert it to?

Don't demux it, leave it in the mkv container. Many programs cannot handle elementary streams

mediacoder, any video converter, format factory, avidemux to name a few programs that can handle h.264/mkv

[Hoser Rob]

I'm also wondering why you want to convert it, and what to. Another device or mobile?

The problem isn't whether it's pal/ntsc or the extension or whether it's mkv or not if the file works with your software player.

Since your software player understands the file but your conversion programs don't, I'd suspect it was encoded on a machine with some wonky codec pack. There are a bunch of 3rd party codecs out there that shouldn't be used on a windows system, especially windows 7. For some reason this seems to be epidemic in former Warsaw Pact countries. And there are tons of files floating out there on the web made with them.

This is just one reason I won't use software that installs those non microsoft codecs/filters (the ones that change the windows registry to remap all software in the computer to use them instead of directx etc) anymore.

I'd try what poisondeathray suggested and try different converters. You'd think some of them (like vegas and the pro ones) would be better at handling non standard codecs but they're worse. The serious pro ones assume certain standards that consumer ones don't.

In my experience, which isn't as broad as some here, avidemux has been the one to go to for files that didn't work with others. You may want to download the latest 2.6 build. They work better with h.264.

I've found avidemux is like mplayer (it seems to use the same internal codec libraries). It'll work with just about anything. But it kind of assumes you know what you're doing. It's one of those programs that seems buggy until you get learn how to use it.

There may be other that'll work, and you should try more, but I've used avidemux on files that wouldn't work on other programs. Not on video in a language I don't understand though. You may need that .srt file.

[hello_hello]

There doesn't seem to be anything out of the ordinary with your MKV. After you opened it use MKVMerge did you resave it as a new MKV and try using the new copy?
I use MeGUI to re-encode h264/MKVs fairly regularly, or Handbrake or ffcoder or Ripbot should be able to do it, but the program you'd use might depend on the desired output format.

Since your software player understands the file but your conversion programs don't, I'd suspect it was encoded on a machine with some wonky codec pack. There are a bunch of 3rd party codecs out there that shouldn't be used on a windows system, especially windows 7. For some reason this seems to be epidemic in former Warsaw Pact countries. And there are tons of files floating out there on the web made with them.

I guess then it wouldn't be too hard for you to provide an example, just to give the rest of us a better idea what a video encoded using a machine with some wonky codec pack installed looks like? Or even an example of a Windows codec which shouldn't be used on Windows?

[Hoser Rob]

According to the microsoft tech support site, non microsoft 3rd party codecs should not be used in windows 7. They might have made sense for xp and previous versions. Not now. They can seriously cause conflicts and cause other programs to work less well, or not at all. This forum is crammed with newbies whose systems aren't running properly because of codec conflicts.

There's nothing wrong with software coming with its own codecs. The problems, as I thought I explained, is that good programs use internal codecs that work properly with windows. When they're closed the system is back to normal.

The problem is when the program needs external codec/filter packs that remap the whole operating system. This happens when the developer can't or won't bother writing their own codecs. With those packs nothing on your computer is using the windows directx/directshow interface anymore. That's where the problems start.

Examples? K-lite for one. Look in the tools section ... it says right there it's known to cause conflicts. There are lots of other ones. CCCP is notorious.

I'm also wondering where this file came from.

If you got said file from a torrent site or something similar, which I strongly suspect it came from even if that's not where you got it, there is no way to tell until you try it. It's not like anyone uses mediainfo on those files before uploading them.

Files from those places are extremely unreliable. Even if they didn't make them using unreliable codecs they usually either used crap encoders or they wouldn't have known how to use a good one if they had it. Most of them stink even if they're playable.

I guess the bottom line is, while I'm not as anti warez as many here, I'm not 100% sympathetic when people complain that these files are poor quality.

[-t40-]

the file was missing.

...what's the name of the file ... how about renaming it to "Unicode_Blindness" and try again...

[yoda313]

Could the dts audio be causing importation problems into conversion programs? I would imagine having dts audio in a mkv shouldn't be unusual but could it be an issue for program a instead of program b?

You can use mkvtoolnix (edit you will need https://www.videohelp.com/tools/MKVExtractGUI-2 to do the demuxing) to demux the audio (I'm 99% certain it will - there are a lot of mkv tool programs you can check out if this doesn't). Then you can use eac3to to convert the dts to ac3. You should be able to use mkvtoolnix to remux the new ac3 file into a new mkv file. Than you will have a mkv with the original video and the new ac3 audio. You should use that new file to load into your conversion program.

Though I'm not sure how much of a factor a dts only mkv file would be for modern conversion programs. Are you sure they are up to date?

[hello_hello]

According to the microsoft tech support site, non microsoft 3rd party codecs should not be used in windows 7. They might have made sense for xp and previous versions. Not now. They can seriously cause conflicts and cause other programs to work less well, or not at all. This forum is crammed with newbies whose systems aren't running properly because of codec conflicts.

And according to Microsoft tech support Windows Genuine Advantage is for the benefit of Windows users too.

3rd party codec packs have always had the potential to cause conflicts of sorts. It's just down to the way the Windows merit system works when it comes to deciding which codec will be used for a particular file with a particular program. Windows 7 is no different to XP, except Microsoft apparently made it harder to change the merit of a codec if it came pre-installed with Windows. Aside from that and Media Foundation, which will supposedly replace DirectShow in some future version of Windows, I don't think anything has changed.

Personally, I'm not big on codec packs either. I just install the ones I'll use manually, but saying you shouldn't install third party codecs or labeling them all as wonky is simply ridiculous. I've never used K-Lite but I've no idea why or how CCCP could be notorious for causing problems. It's not even really a codec pack. It installs MPC-HC, ffdshow, Haali splitter.... and that's about it. I install them manually along with a few other system codecs such as Xvid, LAME etc and use them regularly. All the software which uses system codecs on my PC works just as it should.
If this forum is crammed with newbie posts who's PCs don't run properly due to having third party codec packs installed.... well obviously I'm reading the wrong threads.

There's nothing wrong with software coming with its own codecs. The problems, as I thought I explained, is that good programs use internal codecs that work properly with windows. When they're closed the system is back to normal.

Not quite. While it's fine for a player to use it's own internal codecs the problem really begins when you want a program to use a system codec.... but it won't. And of course in order to update a particular codec with some programs you're forced to wait until you can upgrade the entire program while hoping the new version of the codec in question comes along for the ride.... or you're out of luck.

Files from those places are extremely unreliable. Even if they didn't make them using unreliable codecs they usually either used crap encoders or they wouldn't have known how to use a good one if they had it. Most of them stink even if they're playable.

I guess the bottom line is, while I'm not as anti warez as many here, I'm not 100% sympathetic when people complain that these files are poor quality.

Most of your theories there are wrong as most of those places offer quality files these days. Well, when I say "quality" I mean they're encoded correctly using a standard encoder such as Xvid or x264. I'm not referring to the end result of trying to squish a 45min TV episode into a 350MB AVI. And pretty much all of the video in question is encoded using either Xvid or x264, with the odd DivX encoder still hanging in there.... of course they're not all perfect..... but nothing ever is.
Once again though you've offered generalizations without any real facts. Do you have some examples of the "unreliable codecs" you image were used to encode much of this type of video? Or for that matter can you explain how installing additional codecs could effect Xvid or x264's ability to encode properly? Or are you saying there's unreliable versions of Xvid and x264 out there, or there's versions which are adversely effected by installing other codecs in some inexplicable way? How would that work?