Quantcast Why I'm Still Using TMPGEnc (and Remain in the Future) - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #1  
04-18-2004, 05:26 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
bla bla blas here.....bla bla blas "there".....bla bla blas everywhere !

i posted in the optimal scripts thread that i got a new dvd burner
but i'm still doing kvcds for my kids in one single cd-r!

without more bla bla blas, please answer me
after read this 3 pages on the link:
why i have to change!?!?

http://nerds.palmdrive.net/dvds_tmpgenc1.html

http://nerds.palmdrive.net/dvds_tmpgenc2.html

http://nerds.palmdrive.net/dvds_tmpgenc3.html

but please, only answer after read this 3 pages.
...and don't post bla bla blas!

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  
04-18-2004, 06:36 AM
black prince black prince is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,224
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi jorel,

The Gold standard for the best picture quality for mpeg-2 is CCE.
The test results from your links are comparing Transcoders with
Encoders and only ShrinkDVD and Tmpgenc. If quality is what
they are comparing, CCE should be in their comparisons. I
like Tmpgenc for low bitrate, low resolution (352X240) encoding.
It's great for mpeg-1, but author is not updating very much.
Until MEncoder becomes more user-friendly with GUI that works, I'll
stick with Tmpgenc. It's slow, but picture is the best. I just wish
CQ file size prediction was more predictable. Some smart KVCD
member will figure out Tmpgenc's CQ encoder and bring it back to
life. I hope this happens soon

-BP
Reply With Quote
  #3  
04-18-2004, 07:13 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 black prince
Hi jorel,

The Gold standard for the best picture quality for mpeg-2 is CCE.
The test results from your links are comparing Transcoders with
Encoders and only ShrinkDVD and Tmpgenc. If quality is what
they are comparing, CCE should be in their comparisons. I
like Tmpgenc for low bitrate, low resolution (352X240) encoding.
It's great for mpeg-1, but author is not updating very much.
Until MEncoder becomes more user-friendly with GUI that works, I'll
stick with Tmpgenc. It's slow, but picture is the best. I just wish
CQ file size prediction was more predictable. Some smart KVCD
member will figure out Tmpgenc's CQ encoder and bring it back to
life. I hope this happens soon

-BP
all right BP, you're correct too !

but see what details i wrote:
" ...i'm still doing kvcds ...in one single cd-r! "

means:
MPEG1, 320x240 and for only one CD-R

dvdhrink, CCE ...and others (don't know about MEncoder)
can't do that
Reply With Quote
  #4  
04-18-2004, 07:37 AM
Encoder Master Encoder Master is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: (^_^)
Posts: 504
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
@Jorel

I think so, too.

I love TMPGEnc and I still made my Videos on one CD and the best choise is TMPGEnc like this TEST.

But I think to that TMPGEnc is the best in MPEG-2. I've testet also a lot with cce but the Quality of TMPGEnc was better. But everybody should do what's for him's the best.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
04-18-2004, 08:56 AM
incredible incredible is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,189
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to incredible
Im very confused what was the intention of the site and its test above?
As its shure that a fast transcoder never will give the same quality compared to a fresh new encoding of the source.

Thats why Im sitting a long time at my pc ... encoding, ... menue generating etc. and burning to DVD-R
Reply With Quote
  #6  
04-18-2004, 09:39 AM
Encoder Master Encoder Master is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: (^_^)
Posts: 504
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I think he should test with some Quality Transcoders of Pinnacle or CloneDVD.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
04-18-2004, 03:32 PM
muaddib muaddib is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: São Paulo - Brasil
Posts: 879
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by incredible
Im very confused what was the intention of the site and its test above?
As its shure that a fast transcoder never will give the same quality compared to a fresh new encoding of the source.
I think that his intention was to show that if you want quality, than is worthy waiting a long period encoding.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
04-19-2004, 12:48 AM
incredible incredible is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,189
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to incredible
yep, thats right!
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kvcd.net in the future? tengo6dedos Off-topic Lounge 9 07-25-2008 05:17 PM
Mencoder: future enhancements! rds_correia Video Encoding and Conversion 19 05-15-2004 03:16 PM
The Future Of The DVD ezysk Blank Media / Burning Discs 0 04-18-2004 08:04 PM
Python: The future of AviSynth! kwag Avisynth Scripting 0 02-08-2003 12:46 AM
KVCD: Well done, and plans for the future..? Anonymous Video Encoding and Conversion 10 04-24-2002 04:55 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:26 AM  —  vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd