No, we are all bosses

-kwag

Yes, it's superior to CCE No. Not to your eyes, but to Pegasys, Inc's and CinemaCraft's eyes

-kwag

Yes friend Muaddib.
That was my 1st emotion too
About MEncoder
I just think we need more time for it to pass the test.
Don't get me wrong: it's speed and quality are amazing.
But this giant has to lean on makeAVIS (an FFvfw tool) to read avisynth scripts
In that way there's nothing like QuEnc: it reads AVS right out from the box.
Quality and speed are a bit worser than MEncoder's but not for much.
So as Kwag says: the future looks bright.
But that future ain't tomorrow. It's more like in six moths time or something...
C ya

This makes me very nervous

I am asking,no begging please don't leave us "not so computer smart" people behind

Hey
Even if we move to another encoder (command line or not) we're not leaving anyone behind
I speak for myself: I have abandoned tmpgenc/cce for some months now, and have been
encoding exclusively with MEncoder.
And believe me, I haven't missed tmpgenc at all.
It's true I have been encoding KDVD exclusively (high bitrate).
As I said MEncoder's speed/quality is far superior to tmpgenc/cce, but not as good as tmpgenc
when talking about low bitrate.
The reason why I feel we ALL (the community) shouldn't leave tmpgenc is because MEnc is still very
unfriendly for those who are unfamiliar with that tiny dos-box that comes with Win9x/ME/2K/XP.
But as kwag said: lot's of guys are at this very moment trying GUIs and wrappers to make
it seem a bit more friendly.
So, I fool you not when I say, NOONE will be left behind.
Cheers

PS-I'm encoding a KSVCD 480x576 from a 1h51m PAL DVD.
I'm shooting for 2x80m CD-r to keep the bitrate around 1900Kbit.
My PIII-550 with MEnc is doing 5~6fps with latest MA script.
Tmpgenc would do 2~3fps under these conditions

Glad to hear that rds_correia


Please clarify one thing though


Does this mean for kvcd(low bitrate) we will still use Tmpge(i do not have a dvd burner to make Kdvd

Thanx

Interesting question bigggt.
Everybody says tmpgenc is still the king on low bitrate kvcds.
But in fact I don't see much difference.
I assume MEncoder looses for tmpgenc on low bitrate but not for much or else I would notice it clearly.
Or maybe the reason why I don't see it is because most of the times I shoot for 2x80min CD-r
for whatever source.
I was never very keen on using low res and low bitrate templates with tmpgenc.
Maybe others have different points of view.
I don't think it's the end of the world
Cheers

Here's your low bitrate MPEG-1 answer guys
You decide who the winner is ( I alread know )

http://www.kvcd.net/tmpeg.mpg
http://www.kvcd.net/mencoder.mpg

Both samples done directly from VOB (zero filters, and at full 720x480 resolution)
Now, just imagine what will happen when we reduce resolutions to 528x480 or 352x480, and start using filters, leaving even more bitrate for each pixel

I clearly see the winner

-kwag

How I can do KVCD for 1 CD 80 min. with MEncoder or FFMpeg?

I ask also in spanish forum in:

http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10297


Thanks.


-Maurus

Here here! I couldnt agree with you more Kwag TMPGEnc has really gone down the pan lately and not as good as it used to be. Looks like Mencoder seems to be the way to go then.

__________________
Regards.

Michael.

Hey Kwag!

Great approach for CQmatic.

A time ago I did also some CQ non-linear tests but using slicer()s offset based diff slices, ... by this I could test in how diff. also the CQ curve behaves.

Im totally with you that there won't be even a prediction method if using on TmpgEnc which where we can totally confirm on.

a) Diff TmpgEnc versions = Diff. CQ estimation behaviours
b) EVEN if an encoding is done twice using the exact same settings ... there have been outputs where filesizes end up different!

The last days I was trying to find a linux distro I can stuck with .... I think finally it will be knoppix But I will wait until the new Version comes out incl. the captive NTFS read/write engine. Overclockix is horrible as after installing the system modules configurator is EMPTY

Also ... I did many tests on (yes) Bitrateviewer! And I do drop ALLLLLL my "trusts" on Bitrateviewer! as I figured out that the Q curve Means NOTHING in case of our purposes to "assume" the final encoder quality.
But this I will post in another threat.

Hi Inc,
I do love your slicer function but I see it as Kwag.
You see if slicer helps CQMatic to understand that the right CQ is between 62,43 and 63,78 in half an hour it will take 1 or 2 hours and 20-30 small predictions to reach a figure around 729,726...
It's simply crazy the way CQ is working in TMPGEnc...
Hope they fix it.
Cheers

Yes, it's superior to CCE

What about speed? (list in order please)

My posting exactly underlined Kwags p.of view: