Mencoder: Satellite Dvb Capture - Page 2

kwag · #21 06-01-2004, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Latexxx

You should have used one of these for capturing. -> Original MPEG-2 transport stream directly to your HD.

That's a great card Latexxx, but then you still need to re-encode for doing (S)KVCD(KDVD).
But I agree, that with that card (or a similar DVB card) you get the native MPEG-2 stream just as it was transmitted, and then it's a matter of demuxing it from the transport stream, and re-encoding it

The quality should be way better than a capture/re-encode.
BTW, here's a link that talks about DVB. It's an excelent (one of the best!) sites with DVB and MPEG information: http://www.coolstf.com/mpeg/
And they make this great program TSReader which is a transport stream analyzer: http://www.coolstf.com/tsreader/index.html

-kwag

vmesquita · #22 06-01-2004, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by incredible

IVTC=1 in YOUR case does handle it right as NO blending used conversion to PAL was performed! Thats why such videos in a still 29.97 state can also be treaten well using Telecide().Decimate() as they perform "smart" and the source in that still 29.97 state doesnt contain blendings. Those blendings are only aplied IF a norm-conversation to PAL 25.000 interlaced was done.
Take a PAL!1 MTv capture of "Toxic" and perform a simple ivtc, no matter if using avs or mencoder .... you will end up in blendings ... thats why we need restore24() as it "cleans" the 25fps converting from the problems being added by such "rape" conversions to 25fps.

Inc,

I think you're missing a point here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by vmesquita

PLease note that PAL-M, despite the name, is a NTSC variant, not a PAL variant, and has 480 lines and 29.97 fps

PAL-M (the system used in Brazil) is not a PAL variation like PAL-N, PAL-G and PAL-B. PAL-M is, despite the name, a NTSC variation with different color codification! In fact you can even feed PAL-M signal to a NTSC device and you'll be able to see the image, just in B&W.

Quote:

In here we talk about bad NTSC2PAL conversions, NOT the other way around like you said above!
As said more above IF you do capture Sources in the same framerate like they have been produced .. you wont have these problems!

I know, I was just curious about the other way around.

You forgot to mention what happens when converting trully interlaced 29.97 NTSC streams to PAL.

I really would like to know how this is done.

incredible · #23 06-01-2004, 11:01 AM

VM

,

I meant with saying NTSC the fps 23.976 and 29.97 ... you're right with PAL for Brazil etc. but in here all our things do base on framerates.

NTSC truely interlaced to PAL:

DGBob(order=1)
ConvertFPS(50)
SeparateFields()
SelectEvery(4, 1, 2)

I took the routine from the Smoothinterlace conversion scripts at avisynth.org
http://www.avisynth.org/index.php?pa...rlaceFunctions
but I replaced here Smoothdeinterlace with Dgbob as Dgbob is also a full rate deinterlacer and btw its faster and the quality is better.

Latexxx · #24 06-01-2004, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwag

Quote:

Originally Posted by Latexxx

You should have used one of these for capturing. -> Original MPEG-2 transport stream directly to your HD.

That's a great card Latexxx, but then you still need to re-encode for doing (S)KVCD(KDVD).
But I agree, that with that card (or a similar DVB card) you get the native MPEG-2 stream just as it was transmitted, and then it's a matter of demuxing it from the transport stream, and re-encoding it

The quality should be way better than a capture/re-encode.
BTW, here's a link that talks about DVB. It's an excelent (one of the best!) sites with DVB and MPEG information: http://www.coolstf.com/mpeg/
And they make this great program TSReader which is a transport stream analyzer: http://www.coolstf.com/tsreader/index.html

-kwag

I neither have one, but I have one of these for satellite and another one for Finnish DVB-T. The European channel availability is pretty good but the operators tend to be too greedy when stucking 10 channels into one transmitter so they are no good for transcoding. Fortunately, the image quality of DBT-T is much better.

Ps. Most of the American series are sent as 25 Hz progressive 720*576 @ DVB-T. Those would be transcodable if I had a DVB-T card for my PC.

kwag · #25 06-01-2004, 01:11 PM

Here's another capture/encode I did last night, from the movie "Men of Honor"
This one is full screen movie. Clip size is ~10MB:

http://s2.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=85...70D61E90EAECA6

I used the same settings as the previous encode, with minor changes, of course.

Code:

vf=yuvcsp,scale=704:480,crop=0:0,expand=704:480:16:60,pullup,softskip,unsharp=l3x3:0.6,hqdn3d=3:6:2,unsharp=l3x3:-0.7:c3x3:-1.5,noise=3th

-kwag

kwag · #26 06-01-2004, 01:21 PM

That Nokia is a damn good receiver

Mine is a cheap ~$130.00 receiver

But I do like the "Blind Scan" feature it has, that once you are locked on a transponder, you just tell it to do a search, and it will find all signals on the transponder (Video and Radio), and automatically programs the unit

So it's great for "hunting" signals

But you guys in Europe have the BEST in DVB free channel selection

I'm lucky to be farther east of the West coast of the US, and I can get some satellites that are not available even on the West coast. But still, that's a small selection compared to all the satellites that are hanging over you guys

-Kwag