CCE SP 2.5 question

[joeydlc]

I have tested both CCE SP 2.5 (3-pass VBR) and TMPGenc Plus 2.56 (2-pass VBR) to convert my source DV file to SVCD. However, I noticed that the quality of CCE is a little bit inferior compared to TMPGenc. Can someone please tell me what settings should I use in CCE (i.e GOP,Video)
to maximize SVCD quality? By the way, I'm frameserving from Avisynth to CCE. Should I use any special filter in Avisynth? Remember, my source file is DV.

Any help is very much appreciated.

[Kdiddy]

You need to provide more info, bitrate settings, resolution, captured info, etc.

[joeydlc]

Kdiddy,

My captured source file is DV avi. I'm creating SVCD NTSC.
I frameserve from Avisynth to CCE with the following script:
AviSource("D:\movie.avi")
BiCubicResize(480,480,0.00,0.75)

CCE settings are:
3 pass VBR max=2520 ave=1950 min=300
and default GOP settings

[HillJack]

@joeydlc,

What about the "Image Quality Priority" and "Anti-noise Filter"? They are both enabled by default in CCE. The image quality priority is set pretty low by default, and the anti-noise filter is set pretty high by default (imo). Perhaps disable anti-noise all together, and set the image quality priority to about 5 (or even 0, down from the 25 default).

Your bitrate settings are almost identitcal to my tv-cap-->svcd settings, and except for me using 5-pass, I get exceptionally better quality than tmpgenc.

How about your Intra-DC precision setting?

[joeydlc]

All CCE settings are DEFAULT (i.e. GOP, Image Quality Priority, Anti-noise Filter, Intra-DC precision).

[joeydlc]

I have played around with GOP, Intra-DC precision, Image Quality Priority and Anti-noise Fliter settings but still I could not really get at least the same quality as TMPGenc does. The CCE quality is clear and vivid but I'm getting this kind of "unrefined" edges be it a still or moving subject. Unlike TMPGenc, it is "smooth", just like when you apply a SmartSmoother filter in VirtualDub.
The only time CCE quality came at par with TMPGenc is when I encoded using CBR at 6000 bitrate. Even CBR 2520 bitrate is also giving this "unrefined" quality.
I'm really keen at using CCE because of its speed and the testimonies from successfull users. By the way, I'm using a legally registered version of TMPGenc Plus 2.56. Maybe, TMPGenc has finally done it!

So please, all CCE experts, I need your heeeeeeeeeeelp!!!!!

[twentworth]

I'm getting the same problem, I think. The quality I'm getting with CCE is distinctly inferior to TMPG. I'm converting AVIs to SVCD with DVD2SVCD. I'm using CQ with TMPG, and 3 pass VBR with CCE. Image qualtiy priority is 17.

The difference looks like interlacing artifacts. I'm not deinterlacing with either CCE or TMPG, but the artifacts are much more noticeable with CCE - almost non-existent with TMPG.

Can anyone explain the difference?

[Kdiddy]

Image quality of 17 is too high, try like 5. Also under the advanced screen, set your bias to 0. Uncheck linear quant scale. Check zig-zag & progressive. 16-235 luminance, DC precision of 8. Are you frameserving to CCE??, if so you can add TemporalSmooter as well.

[PimpInDaHouse]

Shut up you fan boys. Thats way this is in Newbie Conversion. Why do you think CCE is like $3,000 and TMPG is like $10-20?

[Martyn1980]

Picture quality is all about personal taste, i dont like the image Tmpeg produces, it seems to blur things a little and im not keen on the color, but others prefer that.
Joey you say you are using captured DV Avi, captured from what, i still ocassionaly use Tmpeg for crappy avi files as it deals with artifacts on the original better than CCE which can make them worse.

I hope this isn't going to descend into another CCE vs Tmpeg fight as this never gets resolved, CCE is a high end encoder for DVD, while Tmpg is for VCD which it does very well, but you need a high quality source for CCE as it tries to faithfully reproduce the original the best it can, artifacts and all. Tmpeg does a good job on low quality Divx and Quicktime because it doesn't exaggerate any faults on the original, but from a DVD source it lacks detail and looks too smooth, which is great, but DVD isn't just super smooth, its about realistic color and detail, i personally think CCE does a great job at that, but it can look a tad sharp round the edges especially at high resolutions, but what do u expect when you compress something that has already been massively compressed.

Tmpg looks smoother in my opinion but thats not better, i hate blurring of any kind and dont use any temporal smoothers either, if your capturing from a super high quality source or high quality DVD then you shouldn't need them if you using SVCD and i imagine most here are probably using XSVCD,
My personal settings for CCE are:eg 100min DVD to get onto 2 CD's

Min Bitrate 300. Avg Bitrate 1996. Max Bitrate 4000(Change this to 2520 to keep it in SVCD specs, but preferably go as high as your player will go)
Audio 192k Joint Stereo(Dual Channel if Dolby Surround is wanted)
Image Quality on 8 (ive been lower but settled here)
Anti Noise off or occasionally 1-3 (Depends on Source)
Progresseive and Zigzag checked as Kdiddy said as well as 16-235 luminance
But i usually set the DC Precision to Auto
Bicubic precise resize B val=0 C Val=1 704x576/480
No Temporal Smoother as it removes too much detail
i cant be bothered going into exact resizing details as this is long enough and as it is, but i cant see how CCE can be inferior to Tmpg unless your using VCD bitrates or Mpeg1

[joeydlc]

Martyn1980,

I'm using DV file captured from Sony D8 cam.
I guess this is not a crappy file at all.
Anyhow, I will be trying your suggested CCE settings and will post back my results. Thanks...

[Martyn1980]

i never said you were using a crappy file i just said a lot of people use crappy files and moan that the quality looks bad after conversion, i knew you were using DV but i just wondered were it was captured from, people tend to capture from digital satellite now, which in my opinion is crap quality and thats on my small 21" 4:3 TV, so im dreading what it will look like when i get a 32" Widescreen.

Would you call the video DVD quality and i mean DVD quality not what people say about divx or some mpeg1 templates, proper DVD quality.

Get back to me on those settings, they work great for me from DVD.

[Cooly-O]

My personal settings for CCE are:eg 100min DVD to get onto 2 CD's

Min Bitrate 300. Avg Bitrate 1996. Max Bitrate 4000(Change this to 2520 to keep it in SVCD specs, but preferably go as high as your player will go)
Audio 192k Joint Stereo(Dual Channel if Dolby Surround is wanted)
Image Quality on 8 (ive been lower but settled here)
Anti Noise off or occasionally 1-3 (Depends on Source)
Progresseive and Zigzag checked as Kdiddy said as well as 16-235 luminance
But i usually set the DC Precision to Auto
Bicubic precise resize B val=0 C Val=1 704x576/480
No Temporal Smoother as it removes too much detail
i cant be bothered going into exact resizing details as this is long enough and as it is, but i cant see how CCE can be inferior to Tmpg unless your using VCD bitrates or Mpeg1

Are these settings recommended for analog captures also, or just DV? Would any settings change for the type of capture???

[Martyn1980]

It depends on the quality, these settings will get me very near and i mean very near DVD quality.

Analogue capture isn't that great in my opinion, but im not that familiar with it, but what ive saw, none of it has been great enough to warrant those settings, i usually use 4 or 5 pass VBR so it takes a while even on AVI files

These captures you have what sort of quality are they compare them with a standard like VCD VHS SVCD DVD and i could recommend some settings appropriate, you could use my DVD settings but you could be wasting your time if the quality isnt perfect, you cant make something look better than the original no matter how high the bitrate or how many passes you do.

[ToeCutter]

Shut up you fan boys. Thats way this is in Newbie Conversion. Why do you think CCE is like $3,000 and TMPG is like $10-20?

Dude, your posts are about as worthless as tits on a bull.

The freaking forum title stresses the word NEWBIE.

Chill out

[malducci]

Martyn1980 is right about what people preceive as quality. I personally don't like blur'd video. CCE does not take kindly to artifacts in the source video. I personally use VBR@2400+ 3pass most of the time. I tried setting the image quality to 10, even 5, but I like image quality set to 35 better with the DCT 9 or 10. There are a number if things people consider when judging quality, but almost nobody mentions DCT or luminance(SP) fading in a current frame. I consider this on a priority level of artifacts and dot crawl and black level dot crawl ( I see this more as my apex 500w does not show the black level gamma correctly even on DVD's ). Final Fantasy and A.I are examples of the level of luminance artifacts. Setting the DCT to 9 or 10 and the image quality to 35 helps this at a bitrate of 2400+. The only time that I set the image quality to 10 or 5 is when I'm encoding music videos. I haven't tried TMPG in a while and I might give it another try, but I have a feeling it will not deliver the quality that I judge by from CCE

PS: Digital Cable and Satellite are the worst. I can't believe they expect people to ignore those artifacts!?!? Most channels are 720x480 @ 4000max CBR Even though the pay-per-view channels are supposedly at a higher bitrate, you can still see the artifacts

[malducci]

Oh, BTW I use min1226 - average2400+ - max2590 with 128 audio(besweet). Sure 192 or above sounds better than 128, but I rather put that bitrate into the video - 128 sounds fine to me

[Martyn1980]

I agree on the digital TV, some of the channels here in the UK on NTL Digital look horrible, VH1 Classic, Bravo and Living being the worst, looking like High Res VCD, id be ashamed to produce something like that.

I havn't encoded Final Fantasy yet, keep avoiding it as i doubt i could do it justice, but i dont know unless i try, how does it turn out, compared to the original.

128k audio is fine if your not fussy on sound 192 is a compromise for me as i like good sound, but everyones different, but i dont think the extra bitrate gained from the audio makes that much difference to the video, about 45mb extra for a 90min movie.

[PimpInDaHouse]

Shut up ToeCutter I got the topic from the main page. Even had I tried to help no one even listens to a damb thing I say on here anyways so keep your coments to yourself every time I try to help some one I give them what I consider easy instructions but they take the hard steps from peolpe giveing crap info.

[joeydlc]

Martyn1980,

I have tried your settings, with PROGRESSIVE and ZIGZAG enabled and the rest, playback output is "jerky". With only "ZIGZAG" enabled, playback is fine but still I have this "rough" quality with moving subjects.

I believe CCE gives a sharper quality than TMPGenc, I could see that. If only I could get rid of this "rough" effect, then I'll be as happy as all CCE users are.

[Martyn1980]

I dont have usually have any jerkiness, is it Pal or Ntsc you are using.

I also dont know of the rough quality you speak of on moving objects, i only notice this if i use CCE on really low bitrates, Tmpeg is naturally smoother, but at a cost of detail, its up to each person if thats what they want, if my source is Pal DVD and i use those settings, i get very near to DVD especially in Low and Medium detail scenes, but it seems not everything works for everybody.

[ToeCutter]

Shut up ToeCutter I got the topic from the main page. Even had I tried to help no one even listens to a damb thing I say on here anyways so keep your coments to yourself every time I try to help some one I give them what I consider easy instructions but they take the hard steps from peolpe giveing crap info.

And you wonder why your posts are ignored?

I won't continue to waste the forum's resources bickering with you, so this is my last reply to you. This is a GREAT forum. I've found some excellent solutions to many of the problems that I've had. Many others have found solutions to their problems as well. Posters like you do nothing but to undermine open, honest and best of all...FREE help that a forum like this provides.

Oh.....and start using a spell checker.

[adam]

Read cce's manual. The progressive setting and zigzag scan order should only be used if your source is progressive. Maybe some of the more expensive DV cameras can record progressively but I don't think yours can. Your source is interlaced so you should use the interlaced setting and alternate scan.

DV is ridiculously detailed and requires alot of bitrate to look good. If you can't afford to use such high bitrates as dvds use then you really should look into noise reduction filters in avisynth. Your going to lose alot of the source's detail regardless of what you do. You might as well remove it before encoding so that your bitrate doesn't get wasted on noise.

I'm sure if either of these suggestion specifically address your problem but they should still help you achieve better quality with cce and DV.

For what its worth, I am a huge fan of cce and use it for almost everything, but for DV I think TMPGenc produces better quality.

[joeydlc]

Adam,

Thank you for your input.
I guess I have to stick then to TMPGenc.
I will still try your suggestions, hoping I could get a better quality,
not much, but at least better than before.