Kwag,

As you know I am using the Panasonic DVD-RAM (Vro) as my source, I use TMPGEnc 2.53 on a 1.6 Ghz under WIN2000 Pro. My source movie was The Grinch, My first attempt left me with 580MB file by changing your template to 352x240. My second attempt was the default settings of your template, this gave me a file just over 1Gb. So my question is why the difference? The pictureq quality is great, the sound is great. I jsut can't get the file size down if I leave the defaults as is.

Bud

Hi Bud:
Yes, the resolution makes a huge difference. Some movies just can't make it less than 800MB.

The main reason I chose a CQ=70 was to maintain a reasonable quality ( below CQ=70, the quality degrades very rapidly ) while maintaining a good compression to fit an average 120 minute video in one CD-R.

Here is a reference table for different video lengths that you can use as a guideline.

Video times in hours with the standard KVCD template at 352x480:

1:45 -> 2:00+ CQ=70
1:30 -> 1:45 CQ=74
1:15 -> 1:30 CQ=78
1:00 -> 1:15 CQ=82
1:00 or less CQ=86

If you do a video that the size is above 800MB, then just drop the output resolution in the template to 352x240 and increase each of the values in the table above by 4.

Most probably you'll be able to fit your videos this way, as you said in the grinch above, that the whole film size was 580 MB.

As a rule of thumb, and this is experimental so I can't confirm yet, is that if you increase the CQ in steps of 4, the final size will be about 100MB more.

I confirmed this on a trial a couple of days ago, but I have to try another video to see if the value is constant.

So on your grinch, you could increase your CQ to 78 and in theory the final file size should be around 780MB.

If you do try that, please let us know here, because we can use that as an excelent reference for second runs ( call it a manual 2-passes )

kwag

Kwag, does this file size also work with PAL encodes at 352 x 576?

I have encoded a few episodes of "Home Improvement" which run for about 23.5 mins each. I upped the CQ setting to 80, and the files were coming out at around 390-400 megs each - just fitting 2 onto a CD-R disc.

Hi energys80:

Yes. The CQ values should be about the same for PAL. Just substitute 352x480->352x576 and 352x240-> 352x288.

kwag

Kwag,
In the post on vcdhelp, earlier on there was some reason you gave for putting the res. at 352x480 rather than 325x240. In this forum, you're giving the impression it doesn't matter much. Anyway, just to clarify, why do you put it at 352x480?

Hi Bigswaffo:

The KVCD template's default setting is 352x480.
In some cases, when the video created with TMPEG is above 800MB, I suggest dropping the resolution to 352x240.

But the standard KVCD template is still 352x480.

kwag

Hi all !
I'm new here. I noticed that some of members have got files bigger than 800 Mb about 1Gb.
So this maybe helpful for you : with NERO 5.5.6.8 overburn you can get on CD-R80 808Mb and on CD-R90 (i started to use latterly) you can get 939 Mb . So With Kwag's great temlate and CD-R90 you can get great quality on still one CD .
IF FILE IS BIGGER THAN 939 Mb YOU ALWAYS CAN CUT CREDITS at the end - (nobody sees them).
Hope this will help to some.
bman

Hi bman:

Welcome

How's the compatibility with the CD-R90?.

Does it work in most DVD players? I haven't burned one of those yet
Cant wait to try them out

kwag

Hi Kwag !
I can't tell you about compatibility with all DVD PLAYERS but i can you tell this : I have HU-2010 that supposedly have to play just VCD,DVD & cd cd-R,mp3.
So DVD playback is fine,VCD just CBR is OK ,VBR seem to be tricky .
According specifications of manufacturer no word about SVCD .When i tryed to get more information from service they surprised to hear that SVCD of any kind can play at all. To play xVCD i'm demuxing video & audio and remux with bbMPEG as SVCD !!! yes no mistake -SVCD and playback is perfect (all this because off asinc probs that appear during playback ).
So i think that i got very touchy one and if this one is playng than many others have to.
If you will try CD-R90 and find compatible to others , it could add more power to your great template ( more space more flaxibility with quality and file size)
If there be any specific questions at your service sir !!!
bman

Hi Bman!

Well, I would have to say that with VcdEasy anyhow, You can only get 740 megs onto a cdr-80 with overburn. And about 717 megs without overburn. What are you using for your file size measurement? I use windows explorer. I have done alot of movies now with vcdeasy and this is my general max file size. Maybe others here can post their tests and trials here, so we all can get a general idea of what is going on here. Also, I use 352v240 as my final res. size. Maybe that has slightly something to do with it, but I doubt it.

Hi ZeppelinFan !

File size I've reported was from windows explorer to .
When I trayed to use VCDEasy I've experienced same effect ( file with 808 mb or 939 mb size I could'nt burn at all - he didn't let me to ) .

I think VCDEasy is less accurate than Nero and can't use all disk space for burning as efficiently es Nero ( can be many reasons why )

Anyway , I abandoned VCDEasy for this reason and since I'm Using only Nero with mode 2 .

Try Nero and you'll see how he heldles Burning UP TO the EDGE of disk .

NO PROBS AT ALL !!!
Use VCDEasy only if you entend to add chapters .

bman