Quantcast KVCD: KVCDx3 Still Not DVD Quality? - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #1  
05-21-2003, 09:02 AM
TheDJ TheDJ is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 201
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
HI,

I just tried a conversion from xvid to kvcdx3 (480x480 skvcd), using the latest script posted on 20/5/03. Conversion came out ok, but very grainy and blurry in parts. I've noticed some people are getting perfect conversions and i'm wondering wot i'm doing wrong? am i using the wrong template?

I checked a friends version of a film and i did exactly same movie, his one is perfect mine is not!

Any ideas plz?

Cheerz
TheDJ®
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  
05-21-2003, 09:14 AM
Racer99 Racer99 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 119
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDJ®
HI,

I just tried a conversion from xvid to kvcdx3 (480x480 skvcd), using the latest script posted on 20/5/03. Conversion came out ok, but very grainy and blurry in parts. I've noticed some people are getting perfect conversions and i'm wondering wot i'm doing wrong? am i using the wrong template?

I checked a friends version of a film and i did exactly same movie, his one is perfect mine is not!

Any ideas plz?

Cheerz
TheDJ®
Most of the people that are getting near perfect conversions are using DVD as their source not SVCD's done with XVID.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the more times you encode / convert, the more likely each successive encode will deteriate.

Racer99
Reply With Quote
  #3  
05-21-2003, 09:17 AM
TheDJ TheDJ is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 201
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi Racer99, thx for reply.

SO ur saying that the Xvids/Divx's were originally svcd's? I can understand that. But if source is perfect quality, wouldnt this make a difference?

cheerz
TheDJ®
Reply With Quote
  #4  
05-21-2003, 10:34 AM
m0rdant m0rdant is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 137
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
No, he's saying that people who are doing near perfect conversions with KVCD are using DVDs as source, not Divx/Xvid ect. Although the Divx you are using may look perfect to you it has already been compressed once from DVD, and compressing it again to KVCD is only going to make things worse. You are making a copy of a copy, not a copy of the original. Some Divxs are better than others, and with the right combination of filters you can get a pretty decent conversion, but it will not look as good as doing the same film directly from the DVD...
Reply With Quote
  #5  
05-21-2003, 06:28 PM
Racer99 Racer99 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 119
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDJ®
Hi Racer99, thx for reply.

SO ur saying that the Xvids/Divx's were originally svcd's? I can understand that. But if source is perfect quality, wouldnt this make a difference?

cheerz
TheDJ®
Hey TheDJ,

I was going to try to explain, but m0rdant did it for me. So don't give up on KVCDx3, try make one from a DVD, and then base your results. It's hard to get near DVD quality from a VHS tapelike quality based source. Even if it is SuperVHS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by m0rdant
No, he's saying that people who are doing near perfect conversions with KVCD are using DVDs as source, not Divx/Xvid ect. Although the Divx you are using may look perfect to you it has already been compressed once from DVD, and compressing it again to KVCD is only going to make things worse. You are making a copy of a copy, not a copy of the original. Some Divxs are better than others, and with the right combination of filters you can get a pretty decent conversion, but it will not look as good as doing the same film directly from the DVD...
Thanks m0rdant,

That's exactly what I was trying to say.

Racer99
Reply With Quote
  #6  
05-21-2003, 07:09 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 Racer99
That's exactly what I was trying to say.
Thanks m0rdant and Racer99, as that's exactly what I was going to say

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #7  
05-21-2003, 10:34 PM
sbin sbin is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
You are making a copy of a copy
Actually, it's worse than that. You're making a copy of a copy of a copy, since the DVD itself contains whatever defects and compression artifacts the authoring house may have introduced. Of course, as a practical matter DVD source is the best most of us will ever see, but it can be an issue.

I realize some people may consider that splitting hairs, but the number of poor quality DVDs reaching the market now is becoming somewhat alarming. Fully half the DVDs on my shelf are what I would classify as dirty or low quality DVDs, which will make a crappy VCD or DivX. In some cases, I have actually cleaned up the DVD with AVISynth filters and re-encoded to DVD-R for *higher* quality than the DVD. I recently did this with 'Highlander.'
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Avisynth: Best quality script for 352x240 Bad quality movies!? gq Avisynth Scripting 4 05-29-2003 05:43 AM
KVCD: IMG file to KVCDx3? J-Wo Video Encoding and Conversion 3 03-15-2003 01:14 PM
KVCD: using kvcdx3 with a cq value of 60? big Video Encoding and Conversion 5 02-25-2003 03:49 PM
KVCD: Kvcdx3 file is big - Change quality setting or resolution? dynokeith Video Encoding and Conversion 1 11-24-2002 04:45 PM
KVCD: CQ_VBR Quality Setting and CQ Quality Setting, differences ? MoovyGuy Video Encoding and Conversion 6 07-09-2002 01:37 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:06 PM  —  vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd