How good is tmpgenc at mpeg 2 ?

[bani]

bani,
Is it me or are you the only one advocating the use of the Ligos encoder?
I think that says a lot in itself. It seems we have another self appointed critic here who when his answers fail he has to take pot shots at everyone else to prop up his position.

probably because i actually pay for my software. ligos at $199 is a lot more than most people here are willing to pay, so they go on the cheap with tmpgenc.

i have to wonder about all the people in this forum who use CCE. i wonder how many actually paid for it.

[Treebeard]

Quick run ---- I hear the morality police coming

[kayfam]

bani,

i have to wonder about all the people in this forum who use CCE. i wonder how many actually paid for it.

Thanks for making my point so clear

[bani]

Sorry, offline are you replying to me or Bani ?
I`m open to any suggestions from anyone, i`m willing to try anything & appreciate all your comments - Cheers !

try ligos, i think you'll be happy with the results. ignore everyone who is talking about deinterlacing and mpeg1, it's totally irrelevant to your problem.

good dv captures should not really have any visible artifacting, so any artifacts in the resulting mpeg will be the fault of the mpeg encoder.

[banjazzer]

I suppose if I had paid $199 for something, I would be unhappy about others using better software - particularly if they had not paid for it, (the dirty rotten scoundrels.)

[bani]

I suppose if I had paid $199 for something, I would be unhappy about others using better software - particularly if they had not paid for it, (the dirty rotten scoundrels.)

i paid for tmpgenc too. i only use it for progressive video and muxing/demuxing though.

do you have both tmpgenc and lsxmpeg?

[kayfam]

bani,
Do you work for Ligos Corp or something? Your beating this subject to death with what everyone knows is a mediocre encoder at best.

[bani]

bani,
Do you work for Ligos Corp or something? Your beating this subject to death with what everyone knows is a mediocre encoder at best.

lol, now who is taking pot shots!

pot->kettle->black

[banjazzer]

I also pay for software, although not all software. That doesn't necessarily make me a bad person, and I don't see the relevance in these forums of discussing such matters, or talking about warez.

I am still evaluating TMPG, and was on the point of buying before the changes implemented in 2.57. I don't have Ligos, but I have read about most encoders around. Your point is...?

[bani]

I also pay for software, although not all software. That doesn't necessarily make me a bad person, and I don't see the relevance in these forums of discussing such matters, or talking about warez.

I am still evaluating TMPG, and was on the point of buying before the changes implemented in 2.57. I don't have Ligos, but I have read about most encoders around. Your point is...?

how do you know tmpg is better than ligos if you dont have it and havent used it?

or maybe you can clarify your claim:

I suppose if I had paid $199 for something, I would be unhappy about others using better software

im not unhappy at all. tmpgenc is cheap but it sucks for interlaced video, which is what daznic requires. why everyone else keeps spouting mpeg1 and vcd and blabla stuff totally unrelated and irrelevant is beyond me.

[kayfam]

bani,
No pot shot intended. It was just a simple question. I guess it was just to much for you to handle.

[bani]

bani,
No pot shot intended. It was just a simple question. I guess it was just to much for you to handle.

another pot shot. nice.

again, pot->kettle->black

[kayfam]

bani,
Oh I'm sorry did I offend you?.

[banjazzer]

how do you know tmpg is better than ligos if you dont have it and havent used it?

Well, I listen to what others say. You should try it.

why everyone else keeps spouting mpeg1 and vcd and blabla stuff totally unrelated and irrelevant is beyond me.

I never noticed. Can you be more specific?

[bani]

bani,
Oh I'm sorry did I offend you?.

no, you just amuse me with your hypocrisy.

[kayfam]

bani,
Actually I'm the one that finds you so amusing. You've got your nose so far out of joint on such a stupid issue it's hilarious. I think you need to get a life and let the rest of us get back on topic.

[bani]

how do you know tmpg is better than ligos if you dont have it and havent used it?

Well, I listen to what others say. You should try it.

i listen, but i dont take their word for absolute authority. neither should you.

i make my own evaluations based on my own experience with both encoders, as should you.

you shouldnt take my word for ligos as absolute authority, so you shouldnt take their word for tmpgenc as absolute authority either. try them both, don't be a lemming and just go along with everyone else "just because".

if all i was doing was dvd ripping or vcds then i might be happy with only tmpgenc. fact is, i'm making DVDs from interlaced NTSC DV source material, and tmpgenc turned out to be not very good for this task as daznic also found out first hand. if all he was doing was vcd and mpeg1 then I might recommend tmpgenc to him.

[kayfam]

I think all us lemmings should take a poll. How many if favor of TMPGEnc say ay. Those not in favor say nay.
bani your a trip man.

[daznic]

Yes, i really appreciate everyone`s input but please stick to the relevence of the question, I know tmpgenc is very good, i also use it a lot for converting DVD`s & making mpeg1 movies, other encoders seem to have good points & bad points so i`m not slagging anything off, i`m willing to give anything a go, so lets talk about my particular problem, anyone who has encoded a pal dv interlaced clip & wants a true interlaced dvd compliant end result, & has tried it in both Tmpgenc & Ligos & others & finds tmpgenc the best - Please lets find out why ?
What is going wrong here ? - i would really love to get better results in Tmpgenc because it is much more versatile than anything else ! Tell me how you did it, i`ll try it & see But for now i`ll have to agree with Bani.
Cheers

[bani]

anyone who has encoded a pal dv interlaced clip & wants a true interlaced dvd compliant end result, & has tried it in both Tmpgenc & Ligos & others & finds tmpgenc the best - Please lets find out why ?

the silence is deafening isnt it most of them only ever used tmpgenc and never tried anything else, even fewer have ever used dv. so dont be expecting anyone to rush to answer

maybe you should run a competetion, put up a DV clip and challenge people to make the best encoding possible, and post the encoder and settings they used to do it. then all these uber-tmpg-d00dz can demonstrate their 1337 mad encoding skillz!!!11!!11!!

[banjazzer]

When you already know all the answers, why do you expect any further input?

[banjazzer]

maybe you should run a competetion, put up a DV clip and challenge people to make the best encoding possible, and post the encoder and settings they used to do it.

I'm happy with that. 8)

[adam]

n the past lsx has been absolutely horrid and I would say that anyone who preferred it over TMPGenc was just using TMPGenc incorrectly. But I must say that the latest version is actually pretty good. I still prefer TMPGenc over it for both mpeg1 and mpeg2, and I personally think TMPGenc may be the absolute best encoder for interlaced material and even better than CCE in this regard. But seriously, for all of you who are bashing lsx, have you actually tried the latest version?

[adam]

To the original poster, maybe you already stated it but what version of TMPGenc are you using? The last couple releases have had a serious bug that only presents itself with Pal encoding. I really never use pal so I can't say if this is what's happening with you or not but I know SatStorm posted in detail about this, try searching the forum for it.

In the meantime I suggest you download an earlier version of TMPGenc and run some test encodes to see if the quality is better.

[bani]

n the past lsx has been absolutely horrid and I would say that anyone who preferred it over TMPGenc was just using TMPGenc incorrectly. But I must say that the latest version is actually pretty good. I still prefer TMPGenc over it for both mpeg1 and mpeg2, and I personally think TMPGenc may be the absolute best encoder for interlaced material and even better than CCE in this regard. But seriously, for all of you who are bashing lsx, have you actually tried the latest version?

my experience has been that CCE has the best encoder, except that it doesnt have the block smoothing feature of tmpgenc so it tends to show 'mosquito noise' more than tmpgenc or lsx. but it has quite excellent motion estimation and even insanely high motion doesnt cause CCE problems. its really expensive though. (i used an evaluation version of CCE to test with, but no way I can afford $2k for an encoder)

btw one thing that REALLY kills tmpg and even lsxmpeg are fades to white and fades to black. tmpg and lsx have artifacting problems here while CCE is nearly perfect and can pull it off even with really low bitrates.

[adam]

Mosquito noise is a common complaint of CCE and, no offense, but if you are getting mosquito noise than you are not using CCE correctly.

Mosquito noise is caused because the encoder is allocating too much bitrate to high motion scenes and not enough to low motion ones. This is controlled using the image quality priority setting. The lower the motion in your movie, and the lower the bitrate you use the farther to the right you have to move this. A really action packed movie might look best at 5, while the typical drama will look absolutely horrible at this setting and instead look best at 35 or even 40. I can tell you from experience that for any source at any bitrate it is possible to eliminate all mosquito noise in CCE, you just have to pay careful attention to this particular setting.

If you are just using the default setting here than half of your movies will look great and the other half will look terrible.

For progressive mpeg2 at any bitrate I prefer CCE. For interlaced mpeg2 or mpeg1 at higher bitrates I prefer TMPGEnc. For vcd compliant mpeg1 I prefer Panasonic mpeg1 encoder.

I personally don't think lsx is quite up to par with any of these encoders in these particular areas, but I have only tested the demo. I'll take you word on it since you are using the full version but its not enough to compel me to actually buy the program.

[daznic]

OK here`s the deal, i really do want to get good results with tmpgenc as i said as i think its a good program.
If you want to help, how about posting some templates for me to try or send to me at drrharr@aol.com - i can then see where i am going wrong before i give up on tmpgenc.
Also, where can i get earlier versions of tmpgenc ?
cheers all, 23:40 in UK now so goodnight !!

[BJ_M]

Mosquito noise is a common complaint of CCE and, no offense, but if you are getting mosquito noise than you are not using CCE correctly.

Mosquito noise is caused because the encoder is allocating too much bitrate to high motion scenes and not enough to low motion ones. This is controlled using the image quality priority setting. The lower the motion in your movie, and the lower the bitrate you use the farther to the right you have to move this. A really action packed movie might look best at 5, while the typical drama will look absolutely horrible at this setting and instead look best at 35 or even 40. I can tell you from experience that for any source at any bitrate it is possible to eliminate all mosquito noise in CCE, you just have to pay careful attention to this particular setting.

If you are just using the default setting here than half of your movies will look great and the other half will look terrible.

For progressive mpeg2 at any bitrate I prefer CCE. For interlaced mpeg2 or mpeg1 at higher bitrates I prefer TMPGEnc. For vcd compliant mpeg1 I prefer Panasonic mpeg1 encoder.

I personally don't think lsx is quite up to par with any of these encoders in these particular areas, but I have only tested the demo. I'll take you word on it since you are using the full version but its not enough to compel me to actually buy the program.

i agree with adam .. except when you get to really high bit rates above what CCE is capable of , tmpgenc really does an excelent job (against other encoders often costing 10's of thousands) ..

i have a question maybe someone knows .. in the new version of CCE it seems that the coralation between the old quality settings (number type) are different with cce2.66 which slides between easy and difficult ..
so whats the connection ..

filter off setting - refers to the filters which you can access only by making a new template ..

[rsaintj]

bani,
Do you work for Ligos Corp or something? Your beating this subject to death with what everyone knows is a mediocre encoder at best.

I'm certain Bani doesn't work for us. But I'm glad he likes LSX so much, and that he isn't the only one.

Robert (who respects everyone's tastes)
--
Robert W. Saint John
Director of Marketing
Ligos Corporation (the mediocre pale 5th )

[Vanster]

Sorry to butt in here guys and please forgive my newbie ignorance. My trial period just expired on TMPEGENC. Why should I buy it? I know that it no longer has MPEG2 support after the first 30 days but MPEG1 still works fine. What is the advantage of MPEG2? Do I need that to make SVCDs...or even better quality VCDs?

Once again, I apologize for my ignorance but could someone tell me the advantage of the retail version and MPEG2? Thank you for your help?