Quantcast KVCD: is KVCD the Best? - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #1  
08-10-2003, 06:47 PM
Edlund Edlund is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pazardjik, Bulgaria
Posts: 147
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Actually we all who visit this forum know that it is so, but the visitors of many other forums, for example dvdrhelp.com, are much more than us.
Don't they know about KVCD, don't they like it or what? I stopped using the normal TMPGenc templates right after I first visited www.kvcd.net
But it seemes like many others are using them. So do you know how long movie and with what quality can they fit on one cd? When I saw the "2 hours super quality on one cd" here I didn't believe it but it's true I wonder if all the other people that don't use KVCD templates and stuff can do that. If anyone of you knows the results with other modern encoding methods please tell them to me.
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  
08-10-2003, 07:14 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
Hi Edlund,

The problem with 99% of the people at "other" forums, is that they prefer to stick to lower quality "Standard" methods. I understand that some people don't like to experiment, and squeeze the last ounce of quality as we do here, and they're happy with that. And that's fine
But there's a comment around those forums which I constantly hear, and that is that there's no guarantee that making non-standard VCDs (like we do here) will play in future players. To me, that's nonsence, because I see more backwards compatibility (VCDs/XVCDs) with new players, as time moves on. So newer DVD models tend to play more MPEG variations (KVCD included ) because it's an "Industry Preasure". Whoever stops supporting something, looses
For example, the new CyberHome DVD player, plays raw MPEG files, MiniDVDs, etc. This will of course put preasure on other manufacturers to do the same, because if they don't, they'll be put out of business quickly by the competition
So I guess some moderators at those "other" forums are just "purists" who just rather "click and go" with regular mpeg encoding techniques, and they are happy with that.
To me, that's not fun. Fun it taking a little more time, and going beyond the "Standards"

As to your question: "I wonder if all the other people that don't use KVCD templates and stuff can do that.", the answer is: No, they can't. At least not with "Standard" methods ( Unless they use 3 or 4 CDs per movie )

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #3  
08-10-2003, 10:49 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 think the majority of KVCDers are a bit more hardcore than the average video enthusiast, you know like we are a bit more passionate about it and are willing to work harder for that "now that's what I've been looking for" result.
__________________
-Dano
Reply With Quote
  #4  
08-10-2003, 11:32 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
I'll add some additional words.
Just like "Ham Radio Operators" ( I am one ), who continuously experiment and seek and search for new methods in communications and electronics, I think KVCD has a similar spirit.
And just like the electronics hobbyist , who designs and creates gadgets for their own pleasure, and most of the times, good things come out of them that actually hit the shelves
And I'll give one greater example: "Linux". Started with one person. Doing a clone of Unix. He made a non-standard Operating System, which no standard "comitee" would initially take a look at.
And Where is Linux today
Maybe we can do something similar in the video industry
I think it's only a matter of time ( and preasure )

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #5  
08-11-2003, 10:36 AM
Latexxx Latexxx is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 65
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
I'll add some additional words.

And I'll give one greater example: "Linux". Started with one person. Doing a clone of Unix. He made a non-standard Operating System, which no standard "comitee" would initially take a look at.
Non standard? If something is posix compliant but not tested because it costs ??? is it truly non-standard? Even the first versions could use programs from other minix etc with only little modifications.

Ps. If you do have some spare money check out this.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
08-11-2003, 10:51 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Latexxx
Non standard? If something is posix compliant but not tested because it costs ??? is it truly non-standard? Even the first versions could use programs from other minix etc with only little modifications.
I should have been more specific and detailed
The "First" versions of Linux ( 0.9px ) were not truly POSIX compliant at the time. But the original kernel was designed from scratch, with no code from the original UNIX code. That's what I meant for "non-standard". Just like I can say that KVCD MPEGs are non-standard MPEG streams, but they play in most DVD players, Linux is now POSIX compliant (at the interface level), but internally is a different beast from the original UNIX source code tree. That's what I mean
So it works "like" UNIX, but it's NOT UNIX.

And the real point is that today, Linux has actually replaced many commercial UNIX OS's ( Remember Mark Williams "Coherent" )
They are gone bye bye, because of Linux. And VMIX, XENIX, etc., are (old) toys besides Linux
So a little OS that started it's roots in the internet as an experiment( which "supposedly" was only going to be able to run on I386 platforms), is now embraced by IBM, SGI, and other giant companies and runs on just abour every CPU on the planet. Even embedded systems are being replaced by Linux I used to develop on a system called "RTKernel 32" for some embedded applications I wrote about 6 years ago. I dumped it for Linux, and made some good money too, and didn't cost me a dime

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #7  
08-11-2003, 01:05 PM
Edlund Edlund is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pazardjik, Bulgaria
Posts: 147
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
Hi Edlund,

The problem with 99% of the people at "other" forums, is that they prefer to stick to lower quality "Standard" methodsFor example, the new CyberHome DVD player, plays raw MPEG files, MiniDVDs, etc. This will of course put preasure on other manufacturers to do the same, because if they don't, they'll be put out of business quickly by the competition
So I guess some moderators at those "other" forums are just "purists" who just rather "click and go" with regular mpeg encoding techniques, and they are happy with that.

As to your question: "I wonder if all the other people that don't use KVCD templates and stuff can do that.", the answer is: No, they can't. At least not with "Standard" methods ( Unless they use 3 or 4 CDs per movie )

-kwag
And this is what really surprises me. I mean - I found a link to kvcd.net reading the forums of dvdhelp and spent a whole day to create the first kvcd and than lots of days of experimenting and creating new kvcds) And it's a real pity that I have encoded such good movies with "the old style". Now they look terrible to me. And I think everybody who tries KVCD will be "satisfied" to say the least. But this site isn't so popular. I still can't believe that people can be so stupid)
Reply With Quote
  #8  
08-11-2003, 01:14 PM
Dano Dano is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Brockton, MA
Posts: 134
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks to Kwag I threw out tons of "old style" cd's, they just weren't worth keeping anymore.
__________________
-Dano
Reply With Quote
  #9  
08-11-2003, 01:18 PM
rhino rhino is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Back in Ireland (for a while)
Posts: 166
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Some people find it difficult to admit that other methods of putting video produce better results for its choosen purpose. But they tend to be people who want to see their name in lights rather than pushing the boundaries of technology.

Cheers,
__________________
rhino
Reply With Quote
  #10  
08-12-2003, 09:05 AM
Edlund Edlund is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pazardjik, Bulgaria
Posts: 147
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Does anyone here have friends who do not use KVCD and have seen their best results? That was (maybe the point of the topic
Reply With Quote
  #11  
08-12-2003, 09:19 AM
jorel jorel is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brasil - MG - third stone from the sun
Posts: 5,570
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edlund
Does anyone here have friends who do not use KVCD and have seen their best results? That was (maybe the point of the topic
yes,i have.
the best results from my friends are horribles.


my mail and phone don't stop!

they all want copys from my kvcds and
want to learn how i got it.
some are lazy and i answer:
you have to read in the forum,all you need is there,
i can't teach you cos i need to learn more details too,
and i only encode vobs!

then i send the kvcd links to all!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
08-12-2003, 03:19 PM
Edlund Edlund is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pazardjik, Bulgaria
Posts: 147
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Ok, thanks for the reply
I was asking because I read in dvdrhelp things like "I encoded this ... movie using this ...(not KVCD method with great quality." I'm wandering what does "quality" mean for them
Reply With Quote
  #13  
08-12-2003, 05:11 PM
totonho03 totonho03 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Fallston, MD. USA
Posts: 419
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
kwag:
My background is electronics as well, and for over 33 years I worked within CATV related field, now called broadband, using all types of transport media, from coax and fiber cable to wireless, but within the video, internet and telephony area. One of the things that I used to measure is video parameters, and perhaps this will solve this question, that is comparing the video content for each of the methods used to back up dvds. Unfortunatelly, it requires expensive test equipment, ie demodulator, and the video meauring instruments to read the desired parameters. I no longer have access to such equipment, but perhaps someone who may be working in the video field may be able to perform such measurements and put this comparison to bed.... Just my 2 cents about this.

Regards

Totonho03
Reply With Quote
  #14  
08-14-2003, 10:29 AM
Latexxx Latexxx is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 65
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
I should have been more specific and detailed
The "First" versions of Linux ( 0.9px ) were not truly POSIX compliant at the time. But the original kernel was designed from scratch, with no code from the original UNIX code.
Truly "first versions(0.9)". Check out ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/ ! If being precise, it isn't posix compliant even today. The standardisation process to call it posix/unix compliant just costs too much and future developement might change the thing so much that it would have to be re-tested.
The first version was made to be so compliant it could run sh (or was it some other shell). If it wouldn't have any compliance it would have been impossible to port the first programs from Minix. The book (that I referred before) says that the first versions of Linux (before somebody sent Torvalds the posix standard books) were based on some Sun's computer handbook which told the meanings of posix commands.

Quote:
So it works "like" UNIX, but it's NOT UNIX.
It isn't unix because calling it Unix would cost so much that nobody is willing to pay for that (not even IBM and others).


Quote:
I used to develop on a system called "RTKernel 32" for some embedded applications I wrote about 6 years ago. I dumped it for Linux, and made some good money too, and didn't cost me a dime
Very nice indeed.



[/quote]
Reply With Quote
Reply




Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:53 PM  —  vBulletin Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd