battle of the CBR/VBR/CQ modes

[Martyn1980]

If someone could name a trailer i could look through my DVD's to see if i have it, but an Avi would suppose be acceptable, the ice age one on kazza is pretty good, but its the only one i know of as i usually look for mov files for trailers.

I know thats what kwag's templates are all about, but this one wasnt it was mpeg 2 at 720x480 and wasn't designed to fit on one cd. I dont have the clip anymore as i format my comp every 4 weeks, but i think i'll look for it now if its still available.

[Daagar]

Ahh, that is a different clip then, you are correct. That was done using his KDVD template, which is CQ 65 at 352x480 (CVD) resolution. It uses the Andreas matrix, but uses a standard GOP. I'm unsure if he ever gave a final filesize for The Matrix when the whole movie was encoded with this template. This particular template was designed to make DVD-R compatible files, but can of course be used for SVCD as well.
[EDIT: My bad... there is a full 720x480 template too, which was probably what you were using. No, I doubt this fit on a single 80min CDR

Because of the standard GOP, it probably ends up being a bit larger than an equivalent template with the modified GOP. I do not know how significant of a size difference this would be. It is my understanding that it _only_ affects the filesize, and not the quality.

As for a 'standard test clip', I have nothing against a .MOV trailer either. I had simply never attempted a .MOV -> SVCD conversion before, and wasn't sure it was possible. It appears that .MOV trailers are available on the web all over the place. It is just a matter of using a suitable one.

[Martyn1980]

I would rather not use a mov file as they're not always great quality although the Men In Black 2 trailer is pretty good quality.

As for converting a mov to a svcd mpeg, i have done it a few times, Tmpeg converts these films if you have QTReader.vfp in your Tmpeg directory.

CCE does them too but i havn't done it yet and i would probably convert it to an AVI first as im not sure on how to resize it directly, but i suppose i could find out.

How does anyone feel about downloading a vob file then, they vary between 50 an 120mb, and my Bandits trailer looks great at 100mb.

[Daagar]

I have no problems downloading any size file. Do you have a place you can host it, or provide an FTP location to it?

[Kdiddy]

This is the EXACT same thing I've already said,

You do a CQ with respect of attaining a satsifactory quality level at a "reasonable" filesize, of which you know filesize fits on X # of disks.
Your filesize is determined before you start. VBR gives the exact filesize, your set your CQ value in terms of a guesstimation.

and yet you deny it earlier,

The filesize is never determined at the outset with all my encodes.
It is not known to me before the encode.

and now you come back and say the same thing I just wrote.

It is not inconsistent to want the quality and yet still minimise the number of discs. So I go for a quality setting between 75 and 85, and I find this gives quality acceptable to me on a reasonable quantity of discs.
I will get a very rough idea of how many discs I will need.

Now that I see that you are prescribing to the same "Kwag backpeddle & shuffle" the debate is dead. Number of disks & filesize are the EXACT same thing, this is why they advertise the amount of data the media will hold.

Considering I only have TMPGEnc to encode with, do you not then think it is eminently sensible of me to use what you consider to be the better encoding method for the software I have?

No I find it sensible to go get the best software to do the job.

Comparing TMPG CQ to TMPG 2-pass VBR in a SVCD scenario is comparing trash to trash. Yeah while one trash may be better than the other trash, it is still trash.

[banjazzer]

There is no inconsistency between

The filesize is never determined at the outset with all my encodes.
It is not known to me before the encode.

and

I will get a very rough idea of how many discs I will need.

If you think there is, I see the problem - you cannot understand the English language.

Comparing TMPG CQ to TMPG 2-pass VBR in a SVCD scenario is comparing trash to trash. Yeah while one trash may be better than the other trash, it is still trash.

And now you come clean, and say what you really think. Thankyou for revealing your prejudices to all . 8)

[injunpana]

Comparing TMPG CQ to TMPG 2-pass VBR in a SVCD scenario is comparing trash to trash. Yeah while one trash may be better than the other trash, it is still trash.

Enough talk, kdiddy and put your money where your mouth is. Prove to everybody that Tempgenc and CQ are trash. Daagar has volunteered to do a comparison test between the bests of CCE + x-pass VBR vs Tmpgenc + CQ. He has stated that he is going to use the Kwag template and was asking the CCE/VBR experts the right settings for your method in order to be fair. You regularly malign kwags template so this test should be easy as pie to win, right? Now please email Daagar your tweaks/settings for CCE + x-pass VBR so he can get on with the program. I really want to find out the result once and for all, this thread has gone too tiresome for sometime now.

[Kdiddy]

To not see a difference between "I have dont the know the size" and "I have a rough idea", is simply ignorancy, no 2 ways to put. Ive always said TMPG CQs/2pass VBR is trash in a SVCD scenario when compared to CCE x-pass VBR this is nothing new. It is what has gotten you so irritated throughout this whole wastful thread. No there is no point in contiuning this as you will waffle back & forth as Kwag does. First your main point was "not enough bits", then when that was shot down, u move on "knowing filesize", and not that it got shot down, you claim ignorance. Speaking of Kwag and his "120 min on 1 CD template", please reread what I posted earlier, "To me CCE and 1 disk encodes just dont work." So there would be no reason for me to entertain this "challenge" as I feel as a whole, 1 disk encodes of average 120 min movies are poor quality, regardless of encoder or method, but that is a personal opinion, not a statement of fact. I have done Kwags template & 1 disk CCE xpass, I did not care for either encode, because they both looked equally poor to me. You want to do a CQ test for 2+ disks versus CCE's of the same size, then I have no problem helping Daagar with settings.

[Daagar]

Wait wait wait.... you can't entertain this "challenge" because the baseline isn't up to your level? That shouldn't matter. It is your opinion if you don't care for the results of Kwag's template, that's fine. BUT... for purposes of a direct comparison a baseline needs to be established. Once the baseline is established, we can go hog wild and start doing 3 CD encodes. I prefer to use Kwag's template as a baseline for my own tests, because I'm familiar with the quality that results using his template in TMPGEnc, making it easier to compare against the results from CCE or alternate encoding methods.
"CCE and 1 disc encodes don't work" -- Why not? They work in TMPGEnc, and give great quality in conjunction with Kwag's templates. CCE, by virtue of this thread, should be able to match or exceed that quality in the same file size (regardless of whether you find the quality acceptable or not).

For the record, I went back to my 300meg 52min clip because I realized the flaw in my first test. I hadn't run the CQ version through a bitrate viewer so I could use the correct avg. bitrate. Guess what? The avg bitrate was 576! I did my CCE encode originally with a 746 avg, and it looked like crap next to the TMPGEnc CQ encode, and I had given it too high of an average! I still need to do a more controlled test, which is why I asked for assistance with settings in CCE. When I get the time to do all these tests, I'll try to report my findings.

I believe I found a workable test file as well: divxcrawler.com has a Matrix trailer about 17.4MB in size. I realize divx isn't the preferred source, but for these tests it should suffice, and it is small enough to do numerous tests (unlike 52min clips. Blah).

[banjazzer]

To not see a difference between "I have dont the know the size" and "I have a rough idea", is simply ignorancy, no 2 ways to put.

If I knew the size, I would know the exact size - as would be the case if I used 2-pass VBR. I know the rough size because of my test encode(s), but because CQ takes account that the source material may be difficult, it can never be the exact size. That is why I have a rough idea.

I never mentioned Kwag's templates. It seems you are quite confused. Nor has anything I have said "been shot down", despite your thinking so. And I am not irritated, but you seem to be both irritated and agitated.

[Kdiddy]

"CCE and 1 disc encodes don't work", meaning that I dont care for how the quality comes out..of course it works, Im just not satisfied with the results personally. Yes in theory, the x-pass vbr will be better than the CQ given same filesize. Does everthing work out to theory, no.
My opinion, is that 1 CD xpass CCE and TMPG CQ 1 CD, are equally poor. The opinion was formed based on the extremely low average bitrate would be require to fit on 1 CD, will not be enough to provide an adequate quality to me given SVCD res of 480x480 or 352x480. Bitrate that low is more suitable for 352x240 which is not within SVCD specs. Also through the test Ive done & reading the documentation that CCE offers, It is obviously geared to be used in higher bitrate SVCDs & DVD spec video, not low bitrate/mpeg1 style encodes. Thus which makes CCE a very poor encoder when dealing low bitrates or mpeg1.
Again, in the constraints of how you want to test it, I could care less because I feel thats measuring trash against trash. But if I were force to choose within that parameters you set, I would do TMPG's CQ. Because if I have to be stuck with a low quality encode, I might as well make it quick & easy.

I never mentioned Kwag's templates. It seems you are quite confused. Nor has anything I have said "been shot down", despite your thinking so. And I am not irritated, but you seem to be both irritated and agitated.

I know its hard for you, but please try follow the convo. The Kwag statements were not directed to you. I am neither irritated or agitated, just wish I had never wasted my time with another "Kwag Clone" who confess to having little no experience in mpeg compression, goes by the opinions of what others have written, waffles when their logic fails, wants to debate semantics.

[Martyn1980]

I dont have anywhere i can host the trailer although, i am working on it, but i am downloading the Matrix trailer you mentioned, although it is going really slow is this normal for this site, around 5k a sec, i feel all 56k again.

As for 1 disc on CCE, i havn't done it yet well not with anything really long or high quality, i have done Ali G Indahouse which is 84 mins, but that wasn't a great Divx file anyway, but the Mpeg does look as good as the original and im more than happy with it, but i have heard CCE doen't do low bitrate too well, anything under 1500kbps, but i havn't really tested it that low as i would never be happy with a movie on one disc especially if i saw the original.

[Daagar]

Well... there we go then! I think we have covered all the bases, and any further testing (at least _MY_ tests)/arguing is moot. Here is what we've learned (this is a congolmeration of what has been said before, but trying to make exact quotes is a pain... no offense to anyone):

TMPGEnc CQ > TMPGEnc 2-pass VBR, all bitrates
CCE x-pass VBR > CCE CQ/1-pass, all bitrates

So we can eliminate TMPGEnc 2-pass VBR and CCE CQ/1-pass from further consideration. Going further:

CCE x-pass VBR > TMPGEnc CQ, AT HIGH BITRATES
TMPGEnc CQ > CCE x-pass VBR, AT LOW BITRATES

So, CCE is not the be-all end-all solution. For those that want acceptable quality in a minimum of disk space (ie., via Kwag's templates), TMPGEnc is going to be the superior choice. However, for high quality 2-3CD encodes, CCE's x-pass VBR will win out.

Also, I've personally been more willing to stray from strict VCD/SVCD specs, since I happen to have a player that works well with XVCD/XSVCD. A lot of the arguments in this thread focus on stricter standards, which invalidates a lot of my (and others) arguments. To 'cheat' out more quality sometimes takes going into the realm of non-standards, and some don't have the ability to do that.

Now Kdiddy... what I'd really love is if you could grab the Matrix divx trailer from divxcrawler.com, and encode it in CCE with whatever settings you feel are 'correct' (as if you were aiming for a 2-CD encode), and then relay what those settings are so I can try it myself. I would love to compare the quality between what you do in CCE, with what I do in TMPGEnc with Kwag's template. Since so many people seem to think that Kwag's quality is not great (and I'll I've really seen is what comes out of Kwag encodes), I'd love to see what can be done when set up correctly in CCE.

Here's ultimately what I'd like... I'd like to keep movies within 2-CDs. Kwag's stuff has been great, because it keeps 'most' movies within a single CD! But on those where it spills to two, as others have said, may as well utilitze _all_ the space on both CDs. A set of parameters that does a quality encode in x-pass VBR for 2-CDs on nearly all movies would be great. I guess I'm cheap, and feel that using more than 2 CDs on a movie is wasteful

[banjazzer]

I am neither irritated or agitated, just wish I had never wasted my time with another "Kwag Clone" who confess to having little no experience in mpeg compression

You are right, of course. I have never actually done an mpeg encode. I am just arguing about how I think it might be if I actually did one. 8)

[Kdiddy]

Now Kdiddy... what I'd really love is if you could grab the Matrix divx trailer from divxcrawler.com, and encode it in CCE with whatever settings you feel are 'correct' (as if you were aiming for a 2-CD encode), and then relay what those settings are so I can try it myself. I would love to compare the quality between what you do in CCE, with what I do in TMPGEnc with Kwag's template. Since so many people seem to think that Kwag's quality is not great (and I'll I've really seen is what comes out of Kwag encodes), I'd love to see what can be done when set up correctly in CCE.

Well I would prefer to do a DVD-rip than DivX. Because if it is a true DivX movie then it has already been highly compressed to low bitrate mpeg4. I would rather start with a higher bitrate original, and not recompress something that has already been compressed. Lemme slide over to divxcrawler to see if it is a tue DivX file.

[Martyn1980]

It at last seems as if we are getting somewhere and people are looking for the best way to encode rather than a competition of my encoders better than yours.

I am going to test Tmpeg at low bitrates, cause im curious to know if it is that much better at low bitrates, although i probably wouldn't use it myself cause i want a lot more than just watchable.

As for that divxcrawler page i cant download off that quicker than 5k a sec and it disconnects after a few minutes, the most i got was 3mb, i did get it off this place http://www.staticfree.net/respect/trailers1 but i dont know if its the exact same file, i dont think it is as its 512x384 and its 15.6mb.

I would love to encode a high quality source, but unless someone is willing to host a vob file or a few of us go on kazaa or someother p2p program and try and download one off me or someone else, i dont think its gonna work properly without there being excuses.

[Martyn1980]

sorry just watched that trailer, its pretty shit quality, is it just me who is having problems downloading off divxcrawler.

[Daagar]

Yeah, sorry, the site is slow. My download did complete, but it took its own sweet time. And while the quality is bearable, it looks like the aspect ratio is wrong. So I guess that wasn't a good choice :P I was just aiming for something we'd all be able to access.

I'm thinking I'm a lot more tolerant about quality than most people here! I really need to start seeing some quality svcds

I did find a Star Wars EP 2 divx trailer on divxtoday.com, and got it at 180k/s. Around 27meg.

[banjazzer]

If you are at all serious about running any meaningful tests, you should be using DVD as a source.

[energy80s]

Actually if you are trying to see which one will encode with the least amount of artifacting, then a dodgy DivX would be a good choice. Most encoders will handle clean sources well, but give them a noisy signal and they will artifact all over the place.

[Martyn1980]

Have you any dodgy divx in mind.

I downloaded and encoded that star wars trailer, a few times, only a quick test though ive had a busy day.

I encoded it first using Tmpeg and Kwags KVCD-CQ NTSC Template, and i ended up with a filesize of 14.9MB and an average bitrate of 867kbps

I ran these same setting through CCE, same resolution, Mpeg1, same average bitrate and with a 300min 2300 max using 3 pass VBR.

I have to say the Tmpeg clip looked better, less noise, especially in the flying scenes, although the CCE clip was visibly sharper and clearer.

I then ran the same clip through Kwags KVCD-X2 CQ NTSC Template and had a 25.4mb file size(This is for video only)with an average bitrate of 1478kbps, i again ran the exact same settings through CCE as the ones used in Tmpeg an i ended up with 2 files of the same size and same average bitrate.

This time the CCE clip looked better, a lot sharper and less blurred although there looked a tad less blocks on the Tmpeg clip, but it didn't look as sharp as the CCE one and there was no noise reduction used on the CCE clip.

So i guess this proves to me what most people have been saying,

If you want 70-120mins on a disc use Tmpeg
0 -70mins then use CCE if you have that option

As for encode times well about the same, a little bit quicker on Tmpeg but we're talking 30 seconds here.

I personally will be sticking to CCE as i like the speed and it produces a picture more to my tastes than Tmpeg did, Tmpeg looked more like Digital Cable here in UK, than DVD, nice colour but not as sharp as i'd like.

If anyone else runs similar tests i'd be grateful to know the results

[banjazzer]

So i guess this proves to me what most people have been saying, If you want 70-120mins on a disc use Tmpeg
0 -70mins then use CCE if you have that option

If you think this is what this whole discussion is about, I am amazed. I am looking for good quality SVCD, and I would not expect to fit much more than 60 minutes SVCD to one disc. I think even the multipass VBR enthusiasts might agree with me here.

[Martyn1980]

I dont think this whole discussion is about that, but in my opinion and in some of the tests i ran CCE was better at higher bitrates, and i imagine if i do the same tests but on a vob file, and increase the bitrate up to about 2300 average, then the gap between the two will be increased.

On the last few pages of this topic, theres been more agreement on the fact that Tmpeg works better at lower bitrates and CCE at higher bitrates.

I myself never put more than 60minutes on a disc, but what sort of tests should i run how much shall i increase the Q value, i still doubt CQ will be near 3 pass VBR for quality.

Well you encode that trailer if you have it, and give me your settings for Tmpeg, and i'll compare the two.

8)

[banjazzer]

Have you got a link for the trailer?

[Martyn1980]

http://www.divxtoday.com/trailers.html

[banjazzer]

OK.... which trailer? And how do you want me to encode it? I'm not sure what the exact challenge is? And I agree with Kdiddy - I would prefer DVD source. 8)

[puntloos]

To explain VBR simply, it first checks to see how hard certain frames are to encode. If some are easy, they require less bitrate than 'average
resulting in more bitrate left for the rest of the movie. For example mpeg2 is able to specify 'the next frame is identical to the previous one' in -say- 300 bytes, while an entire new frame could cost 80kb.

And of course, you need to set a baseline before you can determine how much playing space you have in the end.

CQ just demands a quality of the encoder. This is fine if you only have 5 minutes of audio, but you could also consider telling the encoder to use 8000kbps. Im sure the result will look perfect and it'll fit on a CD.

But usually DVD players have a certain limit of bitrate they can play back. Most can only play back at 2x max, which is 2500kbps or so, but at that rate you would be able to fit hm - wild guess - 35 minutes on one 700M cd. Usually (movies?) you want 60 min- which is 1500kbps average.

[injunpana]

But usually DVD players have a certain limit of bitrate they can play back. Most can only play back at 2x max, which is 2500kbps or so, but at that rate you would be able to fit hm - wild guess - 35 minutes on one 700M cd. Usually (movies?) you want 60 min- which is 1500kbps average

If you have been playing around with CQ, you would know by now that you could get around putting 2 hour movies in one 800mb cdr that is better than vcd and even some svcds in quality. The kwag template is a good example of this. I most especially like his 704x480-1cd template that is tweaked a little bit by myself to fit a movie in 2 cdrs- the result is stunning. In fact, it is the only method I use now, quick, painless and "near-dvd" quality. And it plays in my player - and that's all that matters.

[banjazzer]

CQ just demands a quality of the encoder. This is fine if you only have 5 minutes of audio, but you could also consider telling the encoder to use 8000kbps. Im sure the result will look perfect and it'll fit on a CD.

Do you have any idea what you are talking about? It may not be nonsense, but it certainly sounds a lot like it.

[Martyn1980]

The trailer was star wars,clone wars, but could be any one of them, and i too would prefer a DVD source, all my best results come from DVD, its only been my last DIVX encode which was a 3 disc ALi, that i was reasonably happy with.

If your using VBR, then an average bitrate of 1500kbps and a maximum of 2520 will get you around 60mins on disc, which is the lowst i would ever go.

All respect injunpana but what exactly do u call stunning and near DVD quality, maybe im too fussy but the only time ive ever thought of an encode as near DVD quality was when i was bored and encoded a couple of trailers at 5000kbps CBR, if i see one block, any grainyness, blurring, then im not happy.

And may i ask what your on about puntloos, whats the whole 5minutes audio 8000kbps thing mean, if you ise 8000 then you'll be lucky to get it on 4 discs, audio or no audio.

I have 2 DVD players one were i am right now the yukai, and one back in Glasgow were im originally from which is The Toshiba 210E, so i try to encode for both, i hardly ever use the toshiba, but when i have i know it has struggled with high res high bitrate encodes, and has an audio sync prob on Mpeg2, what i'd like to know is how do Kwags templates play on the toshiba, as most wont play on the yukai as it dont appear to like Mpeg1, i get a green screen on high resolution Mpeg1, but perfect on Mpeg2, im 400 miles from the toshiba so testing is a problem.