Quote:
Originally Posted by break
Concerning my problem with the Matrix movie, I have tried to make a new prediction with ToK, lowering min bitrate to the standard 300. Here the result with the new 2.5 avs script, resolution KVCD3 (PAL) for ONE CD:
CQ 62,581!!!
But now, I cannot use it with my Pioneer 444...
I think I have only one solution, encode it on 2 CD (or buy onother DVD player...).
|
@break,
I'm glad I could be of assistance
. (well,
sort of anyways!
). Too bad it won't play properly on your Pioneer 444 with a minimum of 300kbps.
Personally, I
HATE splitting a movie onto 2 discs!
I just don't like getting up halfway through a movie to change discs...it annoys me. I always settle for a lower resolution encode if/when I must, even though it means it won't look quite as good. (but even @ 352x240, it's still
comparable to vhs, so I can live with it...I'm sure some people wouldn't though...to each his own).
Question: Did you also do a new prediction with Tok using 700kbps minimum again? If so, what CQ level did Tok suggest this time around? Higher than 10 I hope!
Tok is a bit peculiar sometimes I guess
(sort of like an old tv that you have to bang on a couple times every now and then to get the picture to stop rolling
) . Did you also try running a new prediction with a 700kbps-minimum in conjunction with all of the "
tips" I rattled off? I'm just curious what final CQ Tok would predict for your PAL source if you used 112audio, 480x576 resolution, 2 Blocks Overscan, lower unfilter value, etc etc.
Or, you may want to try dropping to 352x576 as
Dialhot suggested. I'd bet it still wouldn't look
too bad at that resolution.
@Dialhot,
Now I see what you're saying about his 700min bitrate. It makes sense. Still, I'm curious to know what CQ Tok would predict if
break tried to use every single little
trick I mentioned. Sure, it might not be ideal, but maybe, just
maybe, it might be just enough to help him squeeze it onto one disc at
almost-kvcdx3 quality (480x resolution does look pretty close to 528/544x).
I just thought that maybe if he could overburn his disc, that might buy him up to ~25MB more. 112kbps audio instead of 128 might save him another ~15 to 20MB. Then add in the extra compression he'd gain from using 480x576 instead of 544x resolution, the 2 Blocks Overscan, and the other filter tweaks. I figured maybe it might have been just enough to barely
squeeeeeeeeeze his movie onto 1 disc at a still "acceptable" quality, close to kvcdx3
.
He also didn't mention if he had cut the end credits off or not, which could save him some space.
Anyways, it's worth a shot. If it still doesn't fit for him, then as you said, 352x576 is an option.
Thanks for the insight
. I didn't realize what a big impact raising the minimum bitrate would have. (and I thought
I had problems needing to encode @ 29.97fps!
)
-d&c
p.s.
Break, you really oughtta buy yourself a truly KVCD-compatible player!
(me too!). It'd make life easier.
I've heard from a few people here that Cyberhome players are very kvcd-compatible, cheap and available in european and u.s. markets.
EDIT: @
Break, nevermind with trying out my suggestions. I was bored and decided to get out my Matrix dvd and try it myself. That 700-minimum is a real encode
killer!!!
I couldn't even fit that movie onto 1 disc at an acceptable quality level using the 352x240 plus template!
I think it's definetly time to retire that Pioneer to the bedroom and invest in a new KVCD-friendly player! (or else stick to 2-disc encodes).
Dialhot, once again, you were right on the money my friend!
Regards.