KDVD via MainConcept ?
 

Just curious but is there is a KDVD template for MainConcept Encoder (standalone). The new version seems to run twice as fast as TMPG. It seems to have all the needed settings too.

Anyone know ? No big deal if not, but it is a fave software of mine, alongside TMPG and CCE.

Search the forum for MCE. You'll find a lot of opinions, most not too good.

-kwag

YEP! Twice as fast as TmpgEnc IN 2PASS MODE!! ;-)

But TmpgEnc does have a very bigger range in CQ values = an accurate prediction is possible and by this you can use 1pass VBR, means CQ mode encoding.

And that will be still faster than 2pass using MCE.

You need this:
Copy de following lines and put it in a text file. Save it with de name: KVCD DVD 720x576 VBR.mef
and put it in: C:\Documents and Settings\[user name]\Application Data\MCMPEGEnc

After this you may find your kvcd template in MCE pulldown menú in main window.

Take a look here http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic....ht=mainconcept

And note that the template is for 720*576 only because under this... hum... you will see by yourself.

Polemic again?

Jon Read make just a question, I give him just an answer.
It is 720*576 because he ask about KDVD.
Under this, I sure you, at, for example, 480*576, I can obtain 800 MB 90' MPG2 KSVCD in 1 CD, excelent quality, from xvid/divx source.
In MPG1 more of this.
El Juli put Damian trilogy in 1 DVD 4.7 GB.
Try it, you know my little guide and yesterday I had post a "Sintonía Fina" method. Compare MCE with TMPGEnc full encode to fit one movie in one CD. Select any other trilogy and put it in one DVD.
(@Inc: Only 1 pass)
Don't compare isolates frames.
Only tell me if you'll try it? I will be waiting your answer.

Where do you see a polemic ? I gave MY advice on this encoder. Telling that *I* find this encoder not good under 720*576 is making polemic according to you ? I call that debating.

A polemic whould have been : "this encoder is a crap and everyone using it should buy a new pair of eyes". But I didn't say that. No ?

Did I say something that make you feel I disagree with the answer you gave ?

I must admit that I didn't notice that when I posted my message. But what *I* think about ME is still the same, even if it wasn't a correct time to tell that.

A 90' movie on a 90' disc you really consider that as a good result ? With tmpgenc I do 1h45 movie in 480*576 on a CD80, and for 1h30 I use 544*576, still on a CD80.
I didn't wanted to start a polemic but, excuse me, you just give the rod to be beaten with.

And I'm sure about the opposite. What do we do now ? Start to fight ? Or let people see by themselves ?
I'm sure you will choose the second solution. And this is *exactly* what I said in myt first post, no ? "You will see by yourself..."


1/ Do you think really I give *MY* opinion about something whithout testing it ?

but also :

2/ I will try with your particular template and a new version of ME because tests I did are quite old now.

As you can read, I actually type the answer above before reading that you requested for that. So you can see that we are in the same mood.

My apologies Dialhot, I did not want to offend you.
"Polemic again" was just a joke.
Sorry, sometimes english is to hard for me. I just mean 700 MB 80' CD.
Well, you are one expert and me no. Maybe you can find the better of MCE. I would wish that anybody compares MCE and TMPGEnc with full encodes.
I NEVER WAS THINK NOR WILL THINK THAT OF YOU.
I think the better of you, not only like techician, but like person. Sometimes a little bad-tempered, but it is possible excuse that. (this is a joke too)

Then put a smiley :-)
I was not offended but surprised. Surprised to feel that I can't give an advice on something I dislike.

Okay. That is still not really good but it's better :-)

Why do you insist on the "whole movie" things ?
If on a 2 minute sample tmpgenc gives smaller file and better result, I can't see how ME would beat it on the whole movie.

The same when you say : do not compare single images. I'm sorry but how can we compare encoders without doing it on single images ?

For sure the "global impress" that you have when you actually whatch the whole movie is important also (as I told in the ffvfw thread, we are doing video here, not photography) but you can't say a encoder is good if still pictures are bad.

I'll try to explain me.
I say whole movie, because in 2 minutes encodes you can set tmpgenc in cq100, then your result can show that tmpgenc is better or equal than mce. If you have limited space (700 MB) you will be needed to drop down cq until tmpgenc can fit the cd. In MCE it is similar like this, but with some tweaks (i explain it in http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=68303#68303 you can drop down de size making bigger the quality.

I say this for same previous reason. If images are taked from 700 MB CD fullfilled I think they can be compared without problem.

out of topic: just for kid!
:rotf:

i read the last 3 posts 3 times.
the first time had great impact and i start to laugh.
the second time is for remember cos i laugh too much and forgot from what part i was laugh!
the last time was to copy some parts:

Phil wrote:
"A polemic whould have been : "this encoder is a crap and everyone using it should buy a new pair of eyes"."
"A 90' movie on a 90' disc you really consider that as a good result ?"
"I didn't wanted to start a polemic but, excuse me, you just give the rod to be beaten with."
"Then put a smiley"
(was fantastic cos seems that means: "you can call me fat but smile" )
"That is still not really good but it's better"
(means: i can live with that)
:hihi:
" we are doing video here, not photography"
.....and some more!

Prodater64 wrote:
"Polemic again" was just a joke."
(you forgot the smile)
" I just mean 700 MB 80' CD."
(means: live with that)
"Sometimes a little bad-tempered,... (this is a joke too)"
(was the best) :hihi:

Phil, you're a joker!
everybody can think that you are "a little bad-tempered"
but i don't think so!
the best is your global vision!
for me you are a joker!

Prodater64, you're a joker too.
.....sometimes scared... but a joker!

and i more than you 2!

:lol: :lol:

ps:

this post is a joke!

:lol:
:rotf: :rotf:

Read again what I wrote :
The size aspect was the first one mentioned. When we compare encoders we compare them for a same filesize :!:

Note: and Jorel, you guessed right, I'm just a :dunce: :-D

@ Jorel: And you are a genius
:D :D :D :D :D :D
(this kind of smile will be right?)

the smiles are perfect!
8)

forget the "genius"...but maybe temper(or geni..l )
:lol:

Well, you know it better than me.
But please, apply the hints that I give in another thread to obtain less filesize with better quality.

Can you tell me exactly which poitn in your manual are the important tweaks to use ? Because you guide is "a little" detailed and I don"t want to miss them :-)
(just tell the number of the paragraphs. I will read them carefully)

You can use the template in this same thread, with these modifications:

I frames = 24 (You know the DVD standard, but it is not problem for playing. If you are not agree, use standard (biger size))
P frames = 3
Auto GP = VCSD
Closed GOP interval = 0
VBR, don't change any values.
Noise Sensitivity = 3 (sometimes 1 = smaller size)
Motion Search Mode = 11 (sometimes 15 = smaller size)
Motion search pixel movement = 2047 2047
User quant matrices = In the template you can see te KVCD matrix.

If you want a more stable Q line, use CQ mode: VBR Max Btr = 6000
Avg Btr = 0 Min Btr = 0

If you give me a 2 minutes source and an avisynth script, I'll give you the mce mpg1 and mpg2 with the best quality for your test.

Don't worry, I have 10 operating digits and a well designed brain, I will do that alone :-) Thanks for the tips. I'll tell you the results of my tests.

Sorry, it would be a privilege to work with you.
:(

Can't wait :!:
Although I'm pretty sure I (we?) already know the answer ;)

-kwag