more size or more CQ?
what is better with KVCDx3Mpeg2 in a 93 minutes film in 1 cdr 700mb?
352x480 with more CQ or 480x480 with less CQ? thanks in advance! :) |
Re: more size or more CQ?
Quote:
-kwag |
hi jorel, you disappeared for a little while and i thought you were at SansGrips' house partying :buzzmile:
well, I don't encode mpeg2- only mpeg1 so i can't use 480x480 unless i use the header trick :roll: i try to always encode 528x480 if the cq doesn't go too low (because mosquitos will appear :x ) - if the videos too long for x3 res. then i'll go for 352x480- but it's very good to try to keep the cq as high as you can- IMO take care- ren |
Quote:
-kwag |
rendalunit wrote:
"hi jorel, you disappeared for a little while and i thought you were at SansGrips' house partying " :lol: no my friend,i was in the top of the mountain to see if the "ufos" came back with Sansgrip. :lol: 2 wise persons ,2 wise friends, 1 (same)wise answer: "352x480 with a little bit of "sharpen" and a higher CQ "(Kwag) and "then i'll go for 352x480- but it's very good to try to keep the cq as high as you can" (rendalunit). than 2 x thank you very much,friends!!! :D you are the best. |
YES!!! Gibbs filter should be at the top of the list!!!!! Where are ya SansGrip?
Code:
LoadPlugin ("C:GripsGibbsKiller.dll") |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
a) KVCDx2-CQ-704x480-_NTSCFilm_-PLUS.mcf b) KVCD-CQ-352x480-_NTSCFilm_-PLUS.mcf c) KVCD-CQ-352x240-_NTSCFilm_-PLUS.mcf d) KVCD-LBR-352x240-_NTSCFilm_-PLUS.mcf |
Mosquito noise is the noise seen when there are sharp edges, you can see it around people in the encoded clip if you watch carefully.
Personally I'd choose option B with the filters that are currently recommended in recent threads. |
Quote:
Also I can't seem to get my CQ above 56 without going over my sample size (9.528MB; audio 128kbps = 83MB). This is the avs I'm using with KVCDx3 MPEG-1 template. Code:
LoadPlugin("C:\WINDOWS\Desktop\VCD Filters\MPEG2DEC.dll") |
Quote:
|
First of drop gripborders behind legalclip(). Secondly how long is your movie? If it is over two hours or full screen you might want to bump it up to two cds. If you want a script that really compresses well try this latest one by KWAG
Code:
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\mpeg2dec.dll") |
Quote:
Which numbers do I change to tone down, the first, the second or both? And do I increase or decrease them? Thanks |
Re: more size or more CQ?
Quote:
ok,ok! i was did 480x480 and now do 352x480. is really better! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- editing: after encode a low action, 480x480 got more sharp... read please: http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic....b480c7d1#21281 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- another question: the movie is 29,97fps and is a musical, Sarah Brightman-La Luna. my player don't work very fine with mpeg1 with resolutions after 352x240, than it was encoded in mpeg2 using KVCDx3MPEG2 ( 352x480 ). muaddib,after answer my pm, told me that most of the musicals are 29,97 and don't needed to use force film, without interlace problems, the result will be good..... and he is very good. 8) in my little tests i see that forced film result in less size that 29,97fps, :o using the same sample (only one chapter for test) and i understood the reason for differents size.... :wink: then i was thinking: :ideasmiley: if i encode this again with the same resolution ( 352x480 ) and forced film, i will encrease the CQ using the prediction to get the final size in 80 minuts cdr. ...after it all,this is my question: using forced film in this case, the result will be better or worse ? :? can i do it to better quality? thank you in advance! :) |
Re: more size or more CQ?
Quote:
If your source is NOT telecined, then you must NOT inverse telecine. If your source is 29.970 NTSC interlaced and you use "force film" (ivtc), then you'll be forcing a 23.976 in a film that's supposed to be at 29.970. This way you will be throwing out frames that will be deeply missed. :wink: Some people say that can't notice these missing frames, but I can. When I watch a 29.970 NTSC movie that was IVCT, those missing frames comes annoying, biting, breaking, hacking and burning my eyes!! ( I love this ENT talk :mrgreen: ) Serious! It gives me a headache... :twirl: |
:wink:
thank you my friend muaddib! :) now all is very clear. for me this thread i very important, solve lots of problems and mistakes. in few posts tons of answers! and 352x480 is really better and faster too,cos get more CQ! thank you friend !!! you help a lot again! :D ps; after encode a low action, 480x480 got more sharp... read please: http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic....b480c7d1#21281 and now??? :? :?: |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.