Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > MPEG-2 Encoding

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 26th May 2008, 09:10   #1  |  Link
Velvet Ghost
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6
Issues with ProCoder 3 and DivX / XviD sources

I'm using ProCoder 3 to encode some files encoded in DivX / XviD into MPEG2 so that I can author them to DVD. The content is mainly rare video footage / TV transmission / concert video of a certain music artist. It's not possible for me to get any better quality sources for these, in some cases no better source exists.

The stuff is mainly from 1965 - 1985, although one particular silent clip was recorded in 1928! In accordance with the times, the quality of the video is mainly poor, with lots of noise, etc. The files have bitrates around 1000 - 2000 kbps.

What I want is a relatively faithful conversion to MPEG2, retaining whatever little video clarity there is. I've heard that ProCoder is better than CCE SP for this particular type (bad source) of conversion.

Unfortunately, even when encoding at 8000Kbps in 'Mastering' mode, I have found a significant drop in quality, even with my untrained eye. The image appears blurred and less detailed and the colours are less vibrant and look faded. When encoding at lower bitrates this quality drop obviously persists, but doesn't seem to be getting any worse. What am I doing wrong? I tried TMPGEnc and Nero codecs as well. As expected, results were even worse than ProCoder.

Thanks in advance.

Last edited by Velvet Ghost; 26th May 2008 at 09:20.
Velvet Ghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2008, 18:44   #2  |  Link
setarip_old
Registered User
 
setarip_old's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,267
Hi!

You might want to save a step or two and simply use (freeware) DVD Flick to convert your DivX-compressed and XviD-compressed .AVIs DIRECTLY to DVD...
setarip_old is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2008, 19:10   #3  |  Link
Velvet Ghost
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6
This should have been clear from my first post, but I have no problems actually performing the conversion - it's just that I'm not satisfied with the quality. I greatly doubt that DVD Flick will provide quality superior to ProCoder 3, which is considered to be one of the best MPEG2 encoders in the market.
Velvet Ghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2008, 22:01   #4  |  Link
setarip_old
Registered User
 
setarip_old's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,267
You won't know for sure, unless you try it, will you? ;>}
setarip_old is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2008, 20:22   #5  |  Link
Velvet Ghost
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6
Here's a snapshot from the original video:



And here's a snapshot from an MPEG2 encoded at 8000Kbps, all settings to highest quality possible, and mastering mode:



Hope that helps in your diagnosis.
Velvet Ghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2008, 22:16   #6  |  Link
setarip_old
Registered User
 
setarip_old's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,267
Quote:
Hope that helps in your diagnosis.
I'm not the one making any diagnosis. I've suggested that you, on the other hand, try DVD Flick and compare the results...
setarip_old is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2008, 22:18   #7  |  Link
Irakli
Registered User
 
Irakli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 185
@Velvet Ghost
Well, Procoder is known to cause excessive blurring sometimes IIRC. Have you tried DVD Flick as suggested by setarip_old?

Also, I would suggest trying HCEnc. I use it with 'bad' & extremely difficult sources (home movies) quite often, and so far I had only positive experience with HCEnc.
Irakli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2008, 22:21   #8  |  Link
45tripp
Dolphin Blue
 
45tripp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 336
i think you should provide a sample clip.

Quote:
Originally Posted by setarip_old View Post
You won't know for sure, unless you try it, will you? ;>}
well...
fair statement in theory,
but highly unlikley.

as far as encoders go,
i'd pick procoder (2, 3 not tested),
and you don't have all that many choices anyway,
so you could go through them in a day.
try HC,
try ffmpeg, with basics, try tweaking
spin Quenc
the easy access free solutions.
then you're left with payware CCE and Mainconcept
to trial.
__________________
injected with feelings; with no final fading
45tripp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2008, 00:20   #9  |  Link
setarip_old
Registered User
 
setarip_old's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,267
@Irakli

Hi!

If I remember correctly, DVD Flick utilizes HCEnc ;>}
setarip_old is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2008, 10:31   #10  |  Link
45tripp
Dolphin Blue
 
45tripp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by setarip_old View Post
@Irakli

Hi!

If I remember correctly, DVD Flick utilizes HCEnc ;>}
not unless there've been drastic changes in the latest betas.
dvd flick uses ffmpeg as it's engine.


also forgot to say,
i've seen negative views about mastering mode
in past years, so you might try a lower mode.
__________________
injected with feelings; with no final fading
45tripp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2008, 12:01   #11  |  Link
MrC
AVStoDVD Dev
 
MrC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 1,302
Why don't you give a try to AVStoDVD. It uses both QuEnc or HCenc to generate DVD-compliant streams. You can setup encoding configuration and, if you are able, you can even play with AviSynth script. Ah, it is free (open source).



Bye
__________________
MrC

AVStoDVD Homepage
AVStoDVD @ Doom9 Forum
MrC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2008, 18:08   #12  |  Link
setarip_old
Registered User
 
setarip_old's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,267
@Immersion

Just to set the record straight, DVD Flick did originally use HCEnc up to v.1.2.0 RC1.

Per the "Changelog.txt" file:
Quote:
Version 1.2.0 RC 1

- Changed: Abandoned DirectShow, HCEnc, AVISynth and Aften in favour of FFMPEG. Hopefully the last big internal makeover.
setarip_old is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2008, 22:33   #13  |  Link
45tripp
Dolphin Blue
 
45tripp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 336
before my time
__________________
injected with feelings; with no final fading
45tripp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2008, 23:56   #14  |  Link
setarip_old
Registered User
 
setarip_old's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,267
A quotable quote:
Quote:
To understand the Present, one must study the Past
;>}
setarip_old is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st May 2008, 09:21   #15  |  Link
manono
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 7,405
1) The pictures were taken from different frames.
2) The second one has been resized by whatever player you used to take the pic. The resizer used could play a part in this.
3) Therefore the pics were taken from 2 different players, making the comparison apples to oranges. Maybe one used the overlay and the other didn't.
4) It's hard to tell, but it looks to me like the second pic was deinterlaced, either by the player or in the script or the encoder. Was the source interlaced and the output made progressive one way or another?
5) What script did you use?
manono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd June 2008, 15:52   #16  |  Link
Velvet Ghost
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6
Sorry I've been away for so long. Thanks for responding, manono. The pictures were taken on the same frame, both using Windows Media Player Classic, using the 'go to frame' feature directly! And the second picture is not resized, just letterboxed. Here's all the information you should need about the source and the output:

Source:
General #0
Complete name : C:\Users\Atriya\Videos\1.avi
Format : AVI
Format/Info : Audio Video Interleave
Format/Family : RIFF
File size : 1.22 GiB
PlayTime : 1h 43mn
Bit rate : 1691 Kbps
StreamSize/String : 8.75 MiB

Video #0
Codec : DivX 5
Codec/Family : MPEG-4V
Codec settings, Packet bitst : No
Codec settings, BVOP : Yes
Codec settings, QPel : No
Codec settings, GMC : 0
Codec settings, Matrix : Default
PlayTime : 1h 43mn
Bit rate : 1519 Kbps
Width : 720 pixels
Height : 480 pixels
Display Aspect ratio : 1.500
Frame rate : 29.970 fps
Standard : NTSC
Resolution : 8 bits
Interlacement : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.147
StreamSize/String : 1.10 GiB
Writing library : DivX 5.0.2
Writing library/Date : UTC 2002-05-16

Audio #0
Codec : MPEG-1 Audio layer 3
Codec profile : Joint stereo
Bit rate mode : CBR
Bit rate : 160 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Sampling rate : 44.1 KHz
Resolution : 16 bits
StreamSize/String : 118 MiB
Writing library : LAME3.92
Encoding settings : CBR
Coherency/PlayTime : 9287

Result:
General #0
Complete name : C:\Users\Atriya\Videos\1.m2v
Format : MPEG-2 Video
Format/Family : MPEG-2
File size : 25.0 MiB
PlayTime : 25s 1ms
Bit rate : 8391 Kbps

Video #0
Codec : MPEG-2 Video
Codec/Family : MPEG-V
Codec profile : Main@Main
Codec settings, Matrix : Standard
PlayTime : 25s 1ms
Bit rate mode : CBR
Bit rate : 8052 Kbps
Nominal bit rate : 9800 Kbps
Width : 720 pixels
Height : 480 pixels
Display Aspect ratio : 4/3
Frame rate : 29.970 fps
Standard : NTSC
Chroma : 4:2:0
Interlacement : Top Field First
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.946

In the meantime, I encoded the same thing with QuEnc, using the highest possible settings, though that took 15 mins to encode 40 seconds, even on my Core 2 Duo. Here's the result:



Here are the specs of the output file:

General #0
Complete name : C:\Users\Atriya\Videos\clip.m2v
Format : MPEG-2 Video
Format/Family : MPEG-2
File size : 25.5 MiB
PlayTime : 39s 767ms
Bit rate : 5386 Kbps

Video #0
Codec : MPEG-2 Video
Codec/Family : MPEG-V
Codec profile : Main@Main
Codec settings, Matrix : Standard
PlayTime : 39s 767ms
Bit rate mode : CBR
Bit rate : 5166 Kbps
Nominal bit rate : 9800 Kbps
Width : 720 pixels
Height : 480 pixels
Display Aspect ratio : 1.500
Frame rate : 29.970 fps
Standard : NTSC
Chroma : 4:2:0
Interlacement : Bottom Field First
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.946

I'd say it's much better than ProCoder 3, but keep in mind that it took about 20 times more time to encode. However, its quality is still noticeably inferior to the original.

I also, uploaded a little clip of the source. Here's the link:

http://www.savefile.com/files/1577732
Velvet Ghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd June 2008, 19:49   #17  |  Link
hank315
HCenc author
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 570
Encoded with HCenc: VlHor
__________________
HCenc at: http://hank315.nl

Last edited by hank315; 3rd June 2008 at 21:07.
hank315 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd June 2008, 21:20   #18  |  Link
45tripp
Dolphin Blue
 
45tripp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velvet Ghost View Post
However, its quality is still noticeably inferior to the original.
:>) not much quality in the original.

we all seem to have diff levels,
so i post original and processed of frame 775

original



procoder2 (8000)
__________________
injected with feelings; with no final fading
45tripp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th June 2008, 03:50   #19  |  Link
Velvet Ghost
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6
hank315, that HCEnc encode is extremely faded-looking. I think you're using some faulty settings there, the encoder can't be THAT bad. Anyway, thanks for giving it a try.

Immersion, excellent!!! That's by far the best one I've seen so far. Apart from a barely-noticeable loss in colour 'vibrance' it's virtually 'transparent' to the eye. In running video I'm sure nobody will be able to make out a difference. Problem is, I have ProCoder 3 as well, and I'm getting terrible results! What settings are you using? Are you tweaking a lot?
Velvet Ghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th June 2008, 10:38   #20  |  Link
45tripp
Dolphin Blue
 
45tripp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 336
HC (8000)


the HC encoder is superb actually.


like i said, i've not tried procoder3. I used proc2.
yeah default settings,
what i like and dislike about procoder,
a.you don't have to mess with things cause quality is great with a click of a button,
b.you can';t mess with settings, which is not good for people with tweak fever.

all i did was set source and target to interlaced tff really.

probably didn't even need the 8000 bitrate,
just selected it cause it's what you were using.

in other words it's an easy encode, and more than one encoder will suit.
__________________
injected with feelings; with no final fading
45tripp is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
divx, mpeg, procoder, xvid

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:58.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.