inverse proportionality between the resolution of film?
 

Exists an inverse proportionality between the resolution of film and its codifies through Q in the CCE?

as an example
divx 352x288
352x288=101376/10000=10
I codify with Q=10

544x326=177344/10000=17
I codify with Q=17

Someone has made experimentations in so far as?

What thoughts you of this my hypothesis? 8O
byby

There is no relation between the two except that the more pixel you have, the more you have to raise the Q factor to obtain the same file size in the end.

But your equation don't take in account the length of the movie, and that is what count the most.

More over, on 544*576 pixels you have a lot of pixels that count for "nothing" : the black borders !
(or you already removed them ? you typed 326 and not 576)

For instance all my movies are done in 704*576 and the Q used range between 10 and 30 according to the movie length (and the final file size I want to obtain).

Hi Dialhot

Just was reading this thread today and wondered....

You say that you do all your movies in 704*576 using a Q of between 10-30.

Since you are saying this in the AVI forum, are you saying that you are resizing AVI's to DVD resolution to do this?

I always understood your thinking to be that resizing upward would ALWAYS result in reduced quality. I also thought you were trying to encourage people to get the best possible Q for any encode. 10-30 doesn't sound very high.

Lol. No.: I just didn't remember the name of the forum :-)

For avi sources, as my standaloen supports anything on a KDVD even if it is not standard, I use 544*576 and I encode using tmpgenc, viddeo bitrate 64-3000 and CQ between 80-90. And I put 3 movies on a disc.

You that is always the case :-)

You should read the thread again : here we were discussing about CCE. In this, the best quality is Q=1, the worst Q=100. And for me above Q=30 the result is not really watchable (others will say above 40).

oops :oops: CCE. I read CCE but my mind told me TMPGEnc :roll:

sometimes the old eyes and mind don't work as a partnership.

anyway, another mystery (for me) solved :)

Do you need a scotish translation ? ;-)

:lol: Well if you can make it sound like Groundskeeper Willie from The Simpsons, then you'll be sounding like me in no time :lol:

Actually, my accent is closer to Shrek - Mike Myers does a 'passable' accent but being Scottish, I can spot a fake a mile off.

Dialhot, you must be multilingual then - French, English and a touch of Portuguese? Impressive. I can speak a small amount of Norwegian, but I don't see any Norsk people in here.

Actually, why is it only really Portuguese and English in here? Why not other languages? Is it cos some of the 'gurus' are from Portugal?

How about spanish? :!: :!: :!: It has a little bit of movement.
But Italian, German and French are so quiet. :)

Actually, in order or fluentlyness (english ?) : french, english, italian, spanish and really few portuguese.

Worse : except Rui, there are all Brazilians ;-)