Quantcast Inverse Proportionality Between the Resolution of Film? - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #1  
06-21-2004, 09:12 AM
zagor zagor is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Italia
Posts: 226
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
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?
byby
Reply With Quote
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Site Staff / Ad Manager
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #2  
06-21-2004, 09:21 AM
Dialhot Dialhot is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,463
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
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).
Reply With Quote
  #3  
07-10-2004, 04:10 AM
fingerbob fingerbob is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 124
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
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.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
07-10-2004, 06:58 AM
Dialhot Dialhot is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,463
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbob
Since you are saying this in the AVI forum, are you saying that you are resizing AVI's to DVD resolution to do this?
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.

Quote:
I always understood your thinking to be that resizing upward would ALWAYS result in reduced quality.
You that is always the case

Quote:
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.
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).
Reply With Quote
  #5  
07-10-2004, 05:58 PM
fingerbob fingerbob is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 124
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
oops CCE. I read CCE but my mind told me TMPGEnc

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

anyway, another mystery (for me) solved
Reply With Quote
  #6  
07-10-2004, 06:40 PM
Dialhot Dialhot is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,463
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Do you need a scotish translation ?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
07-10-2004, 06:51 PM
fingerbob fingerbob is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 124
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Well if you can make it sound like Groundskeeper Willie from The Simpsons, then you'll be sounding like me in no time

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?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
07-10-2004, 07:08 PM
Prodater64 Prodater64 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Palma de Mallorca - España
Posts: 2,925
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
How about spanish? It has a little bit of movement.
But Italian, German and French are so quiet.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
07-10-2004, 07:10 PM
Dialhot Dialhot is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,463
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by fingerbob
Dialhot, you must be multilingual then - French, English and a touch of Portuguese?
Actually, in order or fluentlyness (english ?) : french, english, italian, spanish and really few portuguese.

Quote:
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?
Worse : except Rui, there are all Brazilians
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TMPGEnc: Should I Inverse telecine? phuquehair Video Encoding and Conversion 4 06-06-2006 02:25 AM
TMPGEnc: Inverse Telecine novagte Video Encoding and Conversion 5 10-11-2004 07:20 AM
what Resolution setting to use for a 92-minute long film? risheet Video Encoding and Conversion 8 07-13-2004 08:29 PM
If the original film is NTSC, can I use PAL resolution in KVCD? CheronAph Video Encoding and Conversion 10 11-27-2003 11:01 AM
inverse telecine makes the movie looks jerky? Fistandantilus Video Encoding and Conversion 5 08-26-2003 07:50 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:32 PM  —  vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd