Quantcast Bitrates: When Will Come the Support for CCE? - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #1  
08-08-2003, 06:42 AM
Avalon Avalon is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Venus
Posts: 187
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I encode now some movies with CCE 2.67.00.11 and I got in CQ 37 in the resolution 704x576 with min.Bit: 300 max.Bit. 5000 with AC3 224 5.1 Dolby with Movies with about 90 Min in Ratio 2.35:1 always ca. 1000 MB inkl. AC3 ...

So I do 4 Movies on a DVD ...

I think CCE is now working!

BTW: CCE ist much faster than TMPGEnc and the Quality is even better. For a 90 Min Movie in 2.35:1 with my P4 2.4 Ghz it takes only 2 Hours per movie to encode it !!!!
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  
08-08-2003, 07:07 AM
Dialhot Dialhot is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,463
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
And it is also paying. A not a little...

After all these post on Divx (used only for personnal hollidays movies, for sure ), now you want more support on a product that cost a lot.

I'm not sure all this turn into a good way...

Only my 2 cents.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
08-08-2003, 12:53 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 Avalon

BTW: CCE ist much faster than TMPGEnc and the Quality is even better.
That's true, but only on MPEG-2 is the quality "a little" better than TMPEG.
On MPEG-1, TMPEG just blows CCE away, an that's a fact.

But now that I think about it, CCE is a very expensive product, so maybe I should make CQMatic for CCE another product, and also a pay product

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #4  
08-08-2003, 03:48 PM
vmesquita vmesquita is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,726
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
That's true, but only on MPEG-2 is the quality "a little" better than TMPEG.
On MPEG-1, TMPEG just blows CCE away, an that's a fact.

But now that I think about it, CCE is a very expensive product, so maybe I should make CQMatic for CCE another product, and also a pay product

-kwag
I don't see a lot of difference in quality in MPEG2 CCE comparing to TMPGEnc, for me quality of them is about the same. But CCE is about 3/4 times faster in my system.
About the price of CCE, they now have CCE basic which costs only $58. The problem with CCE Basic is: it doesn't accept custom matrixes (CCE Patcher also can't be used for that) and it don't have 1-pass VBR (just 2-pass). So if there might be any CQMatic for CCE, it will have to be CCE SP...
But please keep CQMatic for CCE free, Kwag!

[]'s
Vmesquita
Reply With Quote
  #5  
08-08-2003, 04:14 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 vmesquita
But please keep CQMatic for CCE free, Kwag!
Hmmm.. , well, let's see: CCE SP costs $1,750.00
Maybe CQMatic for CCE SP ~$49.99 is a fair deal
But only if it's solid as a rock, and works flawlessly
I mean, if someone buys CCE SP, then $49.95 is peanuts. Specially to produce great quality, automatically in a single pass.
I know I wouldn't but CQMatic for CCE, because I don't have $1,750.00 to spend, specially if I can get almost the same results (MPEG-2) with TMPEG.
Personally, I think CCE is WAY over priced, and TMPEG is under priced.
But I believe that if I ( or anyone! ) is going to add value to a $1,750.00 product, hell, I'm going to make something out of it too
Why should CCE benefit from a "value add-on" product, and not the third party

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #6  
08-08-2003, 11:28 PM
Dano Dano is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Brockton, MA
Posts: 134
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I don't think the speed difference is that much if you are doing Motion Estimate Search which I thought we were all using now for the MA script?
__________________
-Dano
Reply With Quote
  #7  
08-08-2003, 11:40 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 Dano
I don't think the speed difference is that much if you are doing Motion Estimate Search which I thought we were all using now for the MA script?
That's true
I think it's about the same, so CCE's advantage over TMPGEnc is now near zero

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #8  
08-08-2003, 11:50 PM
audi2honda audi2honda is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 291
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dano
I don't think the speed difference is that much if you are doing Motion Estimate Search which I thought we were all using now for the MA script?
That's true
I think it's about the same, so CCE's advantage over TMPGEnc is now near zero

-kwag
A few months ago I compared motion fast estimate to CCE multipass in DVD2SVCD using the same MA script from this site and I saw zero difference in quality between the two.

I even took still frames and looked at them 200% and still saw no difference....i'm stickin with TMPGEnc as long as I'm using this great script kwag has developed
Reply With Quote
  #9  
08-09-2003, 10:36 AM
vhelp vhelp is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,009
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi everyone,

Just to add stupdity to all this..

FWIW, I've ben using High quality (slow) in my encodes

So, perhaps I can obtain some add'l speed increases after all hehe ??

And, do I have to run ALL my tests again ?? ?? ??

-vhelp
Reply With Quote
  #10  
08-09-2003, 11:28 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
@vhelp,

Change your setting in TMPEG to Motion Estimate.
You'll get faster encodes and better quality

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #11  
08-09-2003, 11:36 AM
vhelp vhelp is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,009
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Tanx Kwagowsky..

doing it now.. won't know difference or quality results, till I try
it out sooner or later..

..write now, I'm buisy formulating w/ VCALC, I think I'm close to nailing
what/how fitCD / MStaker 's formulas for Ave bitrate and things.. so, stay
tuned.. ..Course, others can chip in if they know

Can't wait to give ME a try (not win ME, dah)

Be well, all..
-vhelp
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bitrates: Multiple audio bitrates and DGMPGDec compatibility rds_correia Video Encoding and Conversion 11 10-23-2004 10:14 PM
DVD players can support 320kbps or 384kbps audio bitrates? vdk_au Audio Conversion 1 01-28-2004 11:07 PM
Bitrates: How about CCE support? Boulder Video Encoding and Conversion 0 11-22-2003 07:26 AM
FFMPEG: [FAQ] AC3 Support Razorblade2000 Video Encoding and Conversion 0 09-13-2003 06:21 AM
MovieStacker: ECL support ? Omega Video Encoding and Conversion 5 03-06-2003 11:54 AM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:17 AM  —  vBulletin Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd