Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

DVD-Software.info
Your one stop source for DVD Software

Profile

Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss Goto page 1, 2 Next

DVD-Software.info Forum Index -> DivX

Author

Message

Alex T.
Guest

Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2004 12:51 pm Post subject: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

I want to transferm my home videos in miniDV format to a PC, probably in DIVX format. What codec and what parameters (bitrate) would you recommend if I don't want to tolerate any visible quality loss ? I tried just running plain old DIVX with default parameters wwhich produced reasonable results, but quality loss (although quite low) was still present. Thanks

the dog from that film yo
Guest

Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:29 pm Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

"Alex T." <alex_s_42@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:25184c1e.0410300051.3e3ced13@posting.google.com...

Quote:

I want to transferm my home videos in miniDV format to a PC,
probably in DIVX format.
What codec and what parameters (bitrate) would you recommend
if I don't want to tolerate any visible quality loss ?

I tried just running plain old DIVX with default parameters
wwhich produced reasonable results, but quality loss (although
quite low) was still present.

Thanks

divx is lossy.

you need to google search for 'lossless codec' to find something - but
lossless codecs will of course have a far lower file compression level than
something like divx -the end result will be a lot bigger.

--
Gareth.
Quote of the day.
You're disgusting! you say he is sex lupines and sweep him away.
A chinese actress suffers the indignity of bad subtitles in the film 'red to
kill'

Richard Crowley
Guest

Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2004 3:36 pm Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

"Alex T." wrote ...

Quote:

I want to transferm my home videos in miniDV format to a PC,
probably in DIVX format.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that you want to use DIVIX?

Quote:

What codec and what parameters (bitrate) would you recommend
if I don't want to tolerate any visible quality loss ?

Leave it in DV if you "don't want to tolerate any visible quality loss".
DIVIX, MPEG, and most other codecs have some degree of loss.

It seems remarkable that you have already decided on DIVIX, but
"don't want to tolerate any visible quality loss" as they seem to be
diametrically opposed.

BB
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 1:53 am Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

Quote:

For zero quality loss use Nero Vision Express to convert your DV home movies
to DVD...surely this can be classed as a PC format with nearly every system
on the market including a DVD burner these days...and it doesn't use any hdd
space. Perfect.

Anyway, it's what I do and I'm more than pleased with the results.

BB
NZ

John S. Dyson
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 3:00 am Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

In article <10o8g2j4231saf1@corp.supernews.com>,
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley7@xprt.net> writes:

Quote:

"andre" wrote
So what? DV is lossy too (its an MJPG derivative).

If the OP is capturing in *DV* then storing in DV (and even editing in
DV) incurrs NO ADDITIONAL LOSS. OTOH any of the other options
DIVIX MPGx etc. DO incur additional loss.

On the other hand I would not use DviX at all but rather MPEG-2, so that
the video can be played on a DVD player.

Agree. But the OP said nothing about writing to DVD.

One thing about 'capturing' DV -- make sure that you start with the

cleanest (most noise free) and most stable source that you can. This
helps the DV encoder to do the best possible job. When using my
later generation ADVC300 (from Canopus), I have gotten results that
are much closer to DV50 than ever in the past.

So, when 'encoding' DV, it can be helpful to use the best possible
encoder with the lowest possible noise source.

John

andre
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 4:44 am Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

the dog from that film you saw wrote:

Quote:

"Alex T." <alex_s_42@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:25184c1e.0410300051.3e3ced13@posting.google.com...

I want to transferm my home videos in miniDV format to a PC,
probably in DIVX format.
What codec and what parameters (bitrate) would you recommend
if I don't want to tolerate any visible quality loss ?

I tried just running plain old DIVX with default parameters
wwhich produced reasonable results, but quality loss (although
quite low) was still present.

Thanks

divx is lossy.

you need to google search for 'lossless codec' to find something - but
lossless codecs will of course have a far lower file compression level than
something like divx -the end result will be a lot bigger.

So what? DV is lossy too (its an MJPG derivative). Well having said that

the OP prob. wants to encode so he won't see the difference. For that I
would recommend a bitrate higher than 1500kbps since DviX is rather
efficient. I would always prefer XviD over DviX and I would adjust the
bitrate, so that I can fit my video onto the media I want to fit it to.
You can use VirtualDUB with all the codecs installed (search online for
a free DV codec) to do the conversion and play with all settings. It
even comes with some pretty sophisticated filters and you can download
plugins. All that is freeware.
On the other hand I would not use DviX at all but rather MPEG-2, so that
the video can be played on a DVD player. For that TMPG is a good choice.
It produces very good results at 2Mbps. Other encoders, esp. the ones in
the consumer DVD mastering tools (Ulead and others) might require at
least 4Mbps.

Hope that answered the question.

Andre

--
----------------------------------
http://www.aguntherphotography.com

Richard Crowley
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 5:27 am Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

"andre" wrote

Quote:

So what? DV is lossy too (its an MJPG derivative).

If the OP is capturing in *DV* then storing in DV (and even editing in
DV) incurrs NO ADDITIONAL LOSS. OTOH any of the other options
DIVIX MPGx etc. DO incur additional loss.

Quote:

On the other hand I would not use DviX at all but rather MPEG-2, so that
the video can be played on a DVD player.

Agree. But the OP said nothing about writing to DVD.

Richard Ragon
Guest

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2004 9:17 pm Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

Richard Crowley wrote:

Quote:

"Alex T." wrote ...

I want to transferm my home videos in miniDV format to a PC,
probably in DIVX format.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that you want to use DIVIX?

Someone in marketing told them it was kewl. :)

-Richard

Alex T.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 2:52 am Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

andre <andre.gunther@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:<RzWgd.15703$6q2.11581@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>...

Quote:

the dog from that film you saw wrote:
"Alex T." <alex_s_42@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:25184c1e.0410300051.3e3ced13@posting.google.com...

I want to transferm my home videos in miniDV format to a PC,
probably in DIVX format.
What codec and what parameters (bitrate) would you recommend
if I don't want to tolerate any visible quality loss ?

I tried just running plain old DIVX with default parameters
wwhich produced reasonable results, but quality loss (although
quite low) was still present.

Thanks

divx is lossy.

you need to google search for 'lossless codec' to find something - but
lossless codecs will of course have a far lower file compression level than
something like divx -the end result will be a lot bigger.

So what? DV is lossy too (its an MJPG derivative). Well having said that
the OP prob. wants to encode so he won't see the difference. For that I
would recommend a bitrate higher than 1500kbps since DviX is rather
efficient. I would always prefer XviD over DviX and I would adjust the
bitrate, so that I can fit my video onto the media I want to fit it to.
You can use VirtualDUB with all the codecs installed (search online for
a free DV codec) to do the conversion and play with all settings. It
even comes with some pretty sophisticated filters and you can download
plugins. All that is freeware.
On the other hand I would not use DviX at all but rather MPEG-2, so that
the video can be played on a DVD player. For that TMPG is a good choice.
It produces very good results at 2Mbps. Other encoders, esp. the ones in
the consumer DVD mastering tools (Ulead and others) might require at
least 4Mbps.

Hope that answered the question.

Andre

Thanks for all the responses. You seem to be the only person, who
actually read the word "visible" :)
Let me state the question in a little bit more detail - I want to
encode my DV video clip, which does not have any fast changing scenes,
without any visible quality loss and with best compression rate
possible, within the limits of the above constrain. I don't care about
not being able to play this on DVD, I intend to watch this video on PC
only.

You recommended XviD with best bitrate possible that gives me quality
I want. Good. Any other parameters I should tweak (and XviD does have
a few) ?

And completely different question - what about H.264 ? It's supposed
to be much superior to mpeg4 and there seem to be a few codecs around.
Are they stable ? Anybody actually tried to work with them ?

the dog from that film yo
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 3:40 am Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

"Alex T." <alex_s_42@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:25184c1e.0410311352.2c8742a2@posting.google.com...

Quote:

andre <andre.gunther@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:<RzWgd.15703$6q2.11581@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>...

Quote:

And completely different question - what about H.264 ? It's supposed
to be much superior to mpeg4 and there seem to be a few codecs around.
Are they stable ? Anybody actually tried to work with them ?

i think they are all beta at the moment - supposedly more efficient than
even wmv9

--
Gareth.
Quote of the day.
You're disgusting! you say he is sex lupines and sweep him away.
A chinese actress suffers the indignity of bad subtitles in the film 'red to
kill'

andre
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 12:03 pm Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

Alex T. wrote:

Quote:

andre <andre.gunther@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:<RzWgd.15703$6q2.11581@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>...

the dog from that film you saw wrote:

"Alex T." <alex_s_42@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:25184c1e.0410300051.3e3ced13@posting.google.com...

I want to transferm my home videos in miniDV format to a PC,
probably in DIVX format.
What codec and what parameters (bitrate) would you recommend
if I don't want to tolerate any visible quality loss ?

I tried just running plain old DIVX with default parameters
wwhich produced reasonable results, but quality loss (although
quite low) was still present.

Thanks

divx is lossy.

you need to google search for 'lossless codec' to find something - but
lossless codecs will of course have a far lower file compression level than
something like divx -the end result will be a lot bigger.

So what? DV is lossy too (its an MJPG derivative). Well having said that
the OP prob. wants to encode so he won't see the difference. For that I
would recommend a bitrate higher than 1500kbps since DviX is rather
efficient. I would always prefer XviD over DviX and I would adjust the
bitrate, so that I can fit my video onto the media I want to fit it to.
You can use VirtualDUB with all the codecs installed (search online for
a free DV codec) to do the conversion and play with all settings. It
even comes with some pretty sophisticated filters and you can download
plugins. All that is freeware.
On the other hand I would not use DviX at all but rather MPEG-2, so that
the video can be played on a DVD player. For that TMPG is a good choice.
It produces very good results at 2Mbps. Other encoders, esp. the ones in
the consumer DVD mastering tools (Ulead and others) might require at
least 4Mbps.

Hope that answered the question.

Andre

Thanks for all the responses. You seem to be the only person, who
actually read the word "visible" :)
Let me state the question in a little bit more detail - I want to
encode my DV video clip, which does not have any fast changing scenes,
without any visible quality loss and with best compression rate
possible, within the limits of the above constrain. I don't care about
not being able to play this on DVD, I intend to watch this video on PC
only.

You recommended XviD with best bitrate possible that gives me quality
I want. Good. Any other parameters I should tweak (and XviD does have
a few) ?

And completely different question - what about H.264 ? It's supposed
to be much superior to mpeg4 and there seem to be a few codecs around.
Are they stable ? Anybody actually tried to work with them ?

Well XviD is not necessarily better in compression than DviX or WMV as
others have suggested here but XviD is open source. In order to use
advanced features in DviX (like quarter pixel, advanced motion
estimation, ...) you have to get the pro version.
Either way, in order to learn how to use XviD properly check this website:
www.doom9.org
They have lots of tutorials. I haven't encoded to mpeg4 in a long time
since I got my DVD burner, so all my knowledge might be a little
outdated. I would turn on everything (liek QPel, and all the other
advanced options and run a two step VBR (Variable Bit Rate) encode.
The encoder runs first and determines the distribution of the Bitrate
across the file and runs a second time to do the actual encoding.
I have gotten extremely good results with 1Mbps (if you tweak it a lot
and do the highest quality encode you can).
Like I said I am not spending that much time on it anymore, since
storage has become so cheap.
H264 is not really implemented yet. There is a free encoder you can get
but with XviD you can still get better quality. Also the computing power
needed to encode in H264 is immense (up to 10 times as long as it takes
to encode XviD).
On www.doom9.org you can find comparisons of encoders and the download
links to encoders and tools (like VirtualDUB which I highly recommend,
its freeware and extremely powerful)

Let me know if you need more help.

Andre

--
----------------------------------
http://www.aguntherphotography.com

andre
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 12:06 pm Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

Quote:

If the OP is capturing in *DV* then storing in DV (and even editing in
DV) incurrs NO ADDITIONAL LOSS. OTOH any of the other options
DIVIX MPGx etc. DO incur additional loss.

How do you define loss? If you can't see it it doesn't matter now does

it? DV format is about 18GB/hour while you can get 700MB/h or less on
XviD. If I can't still see the difference on my computer screen i call
this an excellent trade-off.

Andre

--
----------------------------------
http://www.aguntherphotography.com

Richard Crowley
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 12:22 pm Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

Quote:

If the OP is capturing in *DV* then storing in DV (and even editing in
DV) incurrs NO ADDITIONAL LOSS. OTOH any of the other options DIVIX MPGx
etc. DO incur additional loss.

"andre" wrote ...

Quote:

How do you define loss?

Storage and editing in DV incurs no decompression and re-
compression and construction of derivitave frames like
compressed codecs that do temporal compression (MPEG,
DiviX, etc.)

Quote:

If you can't see it it doesn't matter now does it? DV format is about
18GB/hour while you can get 700MB/h or less on XviD.

And where do you think all that data goes? How much do you
think is recoverable? How many times? TANSTAAFL.

Quote:

If I can't still see the difference on my computer screen i call this an
excellent trade-off.

You are absolutely right. My motto for audio is "if you can't
hear the difference, it isn't worth a penny." And one could
easily make a video corollary: "If you can't see the difference..."

OTOH, remember that not everybody is dealing with YOUR
particular combination of source material, equipment, display
parameters, future editing plans, and quality expectations.
Someone else here also pointed out that with more and more
people installing home theatres, the likelyhood of viewing a
large-scale picture is not as small as it has been in the past.

First hand testimonials are always valuable, but projecting
them as the solution for someone else's situation is not always
appropriate. Probably more valuable to coach them in performing
their own experiments with their own material and resources to
come to the right conclusion.

andre
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 12:43 pm Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

Quote:

"andre" wrote ...

How do you define loss?

Storage and editing in DV incurs no decompression and re-
compression and construction of derivitave frames like
compressed codecs that do temporal compression (MPEG,
DiviX, etc.)

If you can't see it it doesn't matter now does it? DV format is about
18GB/hour while you can get 700MB/h or less on XviD.

And where do you think all that data goes? How much do you
think is recoverable? How many times? TANSTAAFL.

Well you already mentioned one thing above temporal compression.

Since DV is MJPG it does not have this (which makes it excellent for
editing since it is essentially all key frames).
This actually has a huge potential for compression, since most
information can be described by movement vectors alone.
The rest is just like on any jpg. You do some DCT, redundancy reduction
and zip like compression (lzw i belive).
So what you are refering to is redundancy reduction. If you keep the
bitrate high enough you can keep that to a neglibible amount.

Quote:

If I can't still see the difference on my computer screen i call this an
excellent trade-off.

You are absolutely right. My motto for audio is "if you can't
hear the difference, it isn't worth a penny." And one could
easily make a video corollary: "If you can't see the difference..."

Good.

Quote:

OTOH, remember that not everybody is dealing with YOUR
particular combination of source material, equipment, display
parameters, future editing plans, and quality expectations.
Someone else here also pointed out that with more and more
people installing home theatres, the likelyhood of viewing a
large-scale picture is not as small as it has been in the past.

Also right. But since DV only records 720x480 (at least the standard
consumer one). I wouldn't worry too much about judging the picture
quality on a computer monitor (that usually has a higher resolution).
If you really care for how much quality you loose, google for a tool
that determines the JND number (or was it JD, help me out here) that
determines how much you loose. Generally a number over 3.5 means a good
encode. You can compare the source and the encoded material with that
number. The software is usually used to compare encoders.

Quote:

First hand testimonials are always valuable, but projecting
them as the solution for someone else's situation is not always
appropriate. Probably more valuable to coach them in performing
their own experiments with their own material and resources to
come to the right conclusion.

I fully agree. Unfortunately encoding video at low bitrates is a wide
field and one can easily make mistakes. There is no generalized way and
each situation might require something different. During the last couple
of years i learned so many tools and encoders that it is next to
impossible to give the OP a short tutorial.
A good source to start educating yourself is www.doom9.org.
Just start reading and experimenting.

Andre

--
----------------------------------
http://www.aguntherphotography.com

Alex T.
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:02 pm Post subject: Re: Encoding home video (DV) with no quality loss

"the dog from that film you saw" <dsb@REMOVETHECAPITALSgarethyoung.plus.com> wrote in message news:<2ul7vuF2cjajbU1@uni-berlin.de>...

Quote:

"Alex T." <alex_s_42@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:25184c1e.0410311352.2c8742a2@posting.google.com...
andre <andre.gunther@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:<RzWgd.15703$6q2.11581@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>...

And completely different question - what about H.264 ? It's supposed
to be much superior to mpeg4 and there seem to be a few codecs around.
Are they stable ? Anybody actually tried to work with them ?

i think they are all beta at the moment - supposedly more efficient than
even wmv9

Hmm... and BTW, what about WMV9 ? I'm not a big M$ fan, but I heard
some good comments on this codec. How it compares with XviD ?

	DVD-Software.info Forum Index -> DivX	All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum