08-24-2019, 09:30 PM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 20
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
I went back and was reading your post in THIS THREAD where you stated that the VC500 doesn't support MPEG-2. I have used CyberLink PowerDirector 17 to capture directly to MPEG-2 @ ~8,000kpbs using the VC500 and it worked just fine. Comparing side by side to my lossless capture using VDub, it barely looks any different. Could you explain what you meant by that comment? I think maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to say.
This question was asked in a private message. Rather than hide our tech advice in private conversations, Site Staff will often answer PMs (from any site) here in the digitalFAQ.com forum, so that others may read and benefit from our expertise. Please continue the conversation here. Either login or join as a Free Member, and we can continue troubleshooting your video, photo or web related issue. Thanks for understanding our tech Q&A policies. |
Last edited by MadScientist; 08-24-2019 at 09:54 PM.
|
Someday, 12:01 PM
|
|
Ads / Sponsors
|
|
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
|
|
|
08-24-2019, 09:31 PM
|
|
Site Staff | Video
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,508
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
|
|
CyberLink is low-quality software-based compression. The card is not capturing MPEG. It's capturing uncompressed, and passing that back to Cyberlink. If you think quality is the same, start a new thread reply here, show the MPEG settings, post some sample clips of movement/action (not news casts, nothing still).
|
08-24-2019, 09:31 PM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 20
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Ahhh ok I see what you mean. I seen a lot of posts where you and other members were suggesting that it's much more beneficial to capture to lossless first, and then encode to MPEG-2, vs capturing directly to MPEG-2. But most of those posts were from over 10 years ago when PC hardware wasn't quite what it is today. So did you make that suggestion based on the hardware available at the time, or are there other reasons? I know you said that your PC has similar specs to mine, so do you or would you ever capture directly to MPEG-2 with your rig?
|
08-24-2019, 09:31 PM
|
|
Site Staff | Video
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,508
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
|
|
It's still true, and there are more reasons why. The main ones are:
- dropped frames issues
- 1-pass VBR or CBR, much lower quality
The ATI AIW is hybrid hardware/software encoding, and I only use that for non-DVD MPEG capturing. For DVD-spec capturing, certain DVD recorders, mostly LSI-based for tapes, or Zoran-based for off-air.
There are MPEG cards, but those are legacy as well, and ATI AIW is still better.
|
08-29-2019, 03:07 AM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 20
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Perhaps maybe you guys should update the Introduction to Digital Video Capturing, Recording TV guide as the "MPEG or AVI" section states...
Quote:
If no, and you merely want to convert the video to VCD or DVD format, then encode directly to MPEG-1 or MPEG-2. You gain no benefits** by capturing AVI then encoding to MPEG afterwards. In fact, all it does is take more time.
|
Which is exactly what I was thinking (being a waste of time) regarding capturing lossless and then encoding to MPEG afterwards. But as you stated LS there does appear to be some gains by doing this in two steps instead of one.
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:12 AM
|