Quantcast KVCD Template Update - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #1  
05-27-2002, 09:50 AM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
So here we are again

Why another update?

Here are the answers:

Many people liked the original template, because it produced acceptable quality and fit most movies in a single CD.

The last template that was posted, even though the quality was much higher, the file size was very unpredictable. Some movies came out about the same size as the original template and others came out gigantic.

So hopefully this revision solves the problem and fills the gap to please everyone.

The quality is almost as good as the last template ( the one with CQ=80 ) , but the file size increases only around 300k per minute in relation to the original template ( which is not that much taking into account the increase in quality )

Here are the changes to the current template:

CQ=70
GOP 1-15-3-1-0
MIN bit rate 300
MAX bit rate 1,750
P Picture spoilage 0
B Picture spoilage 0 <-------- This is what made a huge change in quality! The default is 20.

Audio parameters were left the same as the last template. Dual Channel 128Kbps.

You'll notice that the quality will be almost like using CQ=80, while maintaining a small foot print on the file size.

Use bit rate viewer ( http://www.tecoltd.net ) to analyze your mpegs.
You'll see the difference from the original template to the new one.

The original template was:

CQ=70
GOP 1-18-3-1
MIN bit rate 300
MAX bit rate 2,300
P Picture spoilage 0 ( TMPEG Default )
B Picture spoilage 20 ( TMPEG Default )
Detect scene change ( checked )

Both NTSC and PAL templates are updated in the links at the main page http://www.kvcd.net

kwag
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  
05-27-2002, 02:43 PM
PlaiBoi PlaiBoi is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 31
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Is there a time table of some sort available, listing the maximum CQ you can use for the length of your movie? Sometimes, i get alot of space left on one CD and id rather increase the quality then waste that space.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
05-27-2002, 02:57 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlaiBoi
Is there a time table of some sort available, listing the maximum CQ you can use for the length of your movie? Sometimes, i get alot of space left on one CD and id rather increase the quality then waste that space.
Here's a thread that has them:
http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic....ght=guidelines

But with the newer templates, there's hardly an increase of quality by increasing the CQ.

So you'll end up with a larger file size, but barely an increase of visual quality. And worse, if you encode with a very high CQ, you might go well beyond 800MB, and then you'll have to re-encode again at a lower CQ.

I suggest to stick with the default parameters, and if your size exceeds above 815MB ( which can be overburned ), then cut the movie in half and burn to 2 CD-R's.

kwag
Reply With Quote
  #4  
05-27-2002, 04:31 PM
PlaiBoi PlaiBoi is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 31
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
No increase in quality at all? Ok. I guess ill just leave it at default then.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
05-29-2002, 07:45 AM
SatStorm SatStorm is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi Kwag
I done a small test with your new template and the movie "cats and dogs" which is almost 90 min
Looked as it was expected in PAL. Believe it or not, it turned out more than 800mb (816mb)

Then, I did a little tweeking: I encode the same movie with your template, but I used 2 Pass VBR with an average of 1050kb/s (max 2520). Turn out 780mb. Overall, looked worst (as expected, cq vs 2 pass), but with much less blocks. It was digital noise all over the picture, but no blocks!
Then, I encoded the same movie as D4SVCD (my xSVCD format, almost like sefy's SxVCD) and looked much better. That was also somehow expected, 'cause the resolution is smaller, so more bitrate goes to picture.
For my tests I use tmpgenc 2.54 plus.

My tests simply show me that for typical length movies, your template don't give more than xSVCD with 1/4 D1 resolution. Sorry...
Maybe with NTSC is different, I don't know what to say....

Looks like your templates are a good alternative for 105min+ NTSC movies. With pal, I don't know... I prefer xSVCD (don't mention CVD, which is a total different story). Further tests needed for better conclutions, unfortunately I don't have more time myself right now to do them. So, it is up to other users for faster replies in the subject.

Have fun and keep up testing!!!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
05-29-2002, 08:05 AM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi SatStorm:

Try this
http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic....0b935ff6c#1039

kwag
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
KVCD: Ripping guide update? skywalker Video Encoding and Conversion 14 01-22-2008 04:47 AM
KVCD Templates Update! kwag Video Encoding and Conversion 0 01-13-2003 01:23 AM
KVCD Templates update! kwag Video Encoding and Conversion 0 12-23-2002 01:07 AM
KVCD: How about a update overview? m0rdant Off-topic Lounge 0 12-10-2002 08:59 AM
KVCD using CCE? update! Daagar Video Encoding and Conversion 9 06-27-2002 05:34 AM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:43 AM  —  vBulletin Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd