Hi, I havnt got a problem really, just something that I wanted to share. I have tried the various DVD to VCD creation methods described in the afterdawn guides, but have found the vidio quality to be relatively poor on all (freeware applications only) ....I have found that the best quality seems to be achieved by using FlaskMPEG (no plug-ins needed) to convert the VOB file string into a single AVI file (This creates an enormous AVI file, typically about 35 to 40 Gb, however, modern hard-drives cope with this easily) ...I then convert to MPEG using TMPGEnc and hey-presto a superb quality VCD ...although it did take 7-8 hours to make. If there was a question ...it would have to be, ....am I doing something wrong with the other methods that is giving poor vidio quality , otherwise I'm quite happy with the method I'm using and would recommend it to anyone to try !!!
You can cut the Time Way down if you do this Correctly...First off there is absolutly No need to Make an AVI file first, This just takes up Time and degrades the Final Quality...What you will Need is a Program Called "DVD2AVI 1.76" what you do is Load your VOB files into this Program and go to "Audio" and det it to the Dolby Digital to "Decode" and make sure that "Dolby Surround Downmix" is checked and that "Track #1" is checked...Now just go to "File" to "Save Project" and give the Project a Name and save it..Now in about 5 minutes you will have a "d2v" Project that represents the Video and you will have a "Wav" audio file that is the audio...Now Run "Tmpgenc" and Load the "D2V" File as the Video source and now load the "Wav" file as the audio source and load the VCD template and encode....This is Called "FrameServeing" the D2V file connects Tmpgenc to the Vob files so Tmpgenc can encode them to VCD...This way Is Faster and will produce Much better Quality files and it is the way that Most poeple do it..If you have any problems Post Back or if you want you can e-mail me .....Cheers
Hi. Thanks for the reply. I have actually tried using DVD2AVI as you suggest, and have found the quality of the vidio to be poor, the audio is fine. I can only describe the vidio results as "jerky", as if, the full frame sequence is missing some how. I didn't realise that TEMPGEnc uses both the D2V and the original VOB files though, and I have a feeling that I may have deleted the VOB files once the D2V and WAV files were created ! I'll certainly give it another go and see what sort of results I get. I would maintain however, that I have found both the audio & vidio quality obtained by encoding the final Mpeg from AVI is superb ....although admittedly time consuming ! I'll give the D2V/WAV method another go as you suggest and see how the results compare !!!
I have a Feeling that you did something wrong when you tried the DVD2AVI method..You Probably didn"t turn on the "Forced Film" setting on which I actually forgot to mention and I also forgot to mention useing DoPulldown to add the 3:2 Pulldown flags...If you don"t use the "Forced Film" option it then frames serves the Files as 29.97fps Interlaced(Teliclined) source which if you encode it in Tmpgenc without useing a Deinterlace filter or IVTC you can get Interlace artifacts that manifests it"s self as Jumpy Playback..With the "Forced film" option enabled it frameserves the File as 23.976fps progressive Film whch is the proper way to do it then after encodeing to a Mpeg2 23.97fps file you use "DoPulldown" to add the Pulldown Flags which makes it 29.97fps without any interlace artifacts and the Quality is Superb....Cheers
Hi. I've just spen the last couple of days playing with DVD2AVI trying out some of your suggestions, but sorry ...the final quality just doesn't match converting using FlaskMpeg and AVI as the frameserving application !! The forced film option is no good to me, since I'm in the UK and converting mostly PAL format DVDs (25.00 fps). Also, I've found that the audio quality just isn't there unless you resample to 41,000 Hz, (which takes just as long as it does to create a decent AVI if you use the high quality option). Also, even then, the final vidio lacks sharpness, depth and fluidity. ...It may possibly just be a querk of the PAL format, but, I've got to maintain that using FlaskMpeg to convert to AVI, then TMPGenc to MPEG maintains picture quality better and the audio conversion at 41000 Hz (by default)gives a noticably better result which I think is due partly to the method it uses to convert 5.1 to stereo .....Even the wife thought that this copy was the best !!! Thanks for the replies anyway, I've had fun trying them out ! ....TMPGenc remains of course the best ! (especially with the MPEG-2 functionality installed !!). ....All the best !!!
Well then your Eyes are decieveing you, and with a Little Knowlege of how Digital video works you would Realize what your Saying is Impossible...The Frameserveing from DVD2AVI to Tmpgenc is 100% Lossless, But encodeing the Vob files to AVI first is Extremely Lossy even More lossy than re-encodeing Vob to Mpeg2, so there is Absolutly No way that the actual Quality would be better when you are Useing a Very lossy Step Like encodeing to AVI before encodeing to Mpeg2..The Only way to Not loose Quality when encodeing to AVI is to encode to Uncompressed AVI (Lossless) or to Use a Lossless codec like "HuffyUV"...And If you Chose the correct Setting DVD2AVI does absolutely Nothing to the audio accept de-mux it, If I have to encode the AC3 to another Format I usually use a different encoder...But I guess if you did something wrong along the Proscess you could get Substandard Quality But Technicly and Scientificly speaking there is no way useing a Lossy method will produce better Quality than a Non-lossy method, it is Just Scientificly impossible..I"ve been working in the Digital Field for 7 years and am presently a Video editor for a Studio in Vancouver and work on some Shows that you have Probably heard of(Stargate SG1, Smallville, Tracker) so I Do Have a Little Knowlege in the Digital Field but I guess as long as you Like the Quality of your Movies that is all that really matters as Perceptual Quality and actual Quality are Two different things and if you percieve the Quality is good that that is all that matters..In School we learned that you can lower the actual Quality and raise the perceptual Quality by introduceing Noise and/or certain Filters, So I suppose a lower Quality image can at times look Better than a Higher Quality image depending on how the Viewer Percieves the Image..well anyways as Long as you are happy that is what matters....Cheers
Ah, well Minion, to continue the discussion where we left off, surely, the lossless conversion of which you prescibe is impossible. By mathematical fact, the object is to convert several Gb of vidio and Audio data into a comparable mpg format occupying only a makimum of 1500 Mb (or two CDR's worth). In this scenario, there can be no "lossless" conversion. It is purely upto the enthusiast to derive the means of conversion that affords him the best "perceivable" quality ! Logically, some data must be lost in the conversion, and to argue the point that "perceivable" quality is worth less than mathematical quality is absurd. It is we, the general public who watch these films, and I must maintain, that regardless of how mathematicaly correct the format is, it is the way it looks is (in my perception) that really matters. ...Otherwise I wouldn't watch it ...and to be perfectly honest, SG1 doesnt really win the oscar for cinemagraphic excellence !!. Schools may preach methods and formula, but so far as film is concerned, the aquirement of excellence lies purely in the opinion of the viewer. The method I use, in my opinion, provides far superior results, to the popularised method that you prescribe to, and I have taken the time to prove the fact to myself. There is no comparison. It nmay take a few hours more, but believe me, all who read this, take the time and try it out, and you'll see and hear the difference. Granted, I'm no hollywood filmographer, but I know what I see, and have had many years of similar experience in the audio field and the method of "so called" Demux DOES matter, because there are a few alternatives, some of which are not so great, (like DVD2AVI's)! Likewise, for the vidio quality, which at the end of the day, FlaskMpeg, does convert to IEEE-1180 standards. ...I'm not trying to be awkward here, but at the end of the day, I know what I see, and have sought the opinion of neutral observers, cusing FlaskMpeg to convert to AVI first DOES yield superior results. How can it no, It does all the hard work before TMPGEnc even gets to it! The aspect ratio is maintained, the VCD format encoded (PAL or NTSC VCD) and the audi0 5.1 decoded to sterio in a most satisfacory method. All TMPGEnc need to do is convert the sizable AVI to Mpeg format, without worrying about the audio or frame conversions ! Quality takes time, and I'm sorry but using DVD2AVI is a method that I have found very quick, but very limited in the quality that it provides. Regardless of the given practices or standards, the eyes and ears do not lie ! There is no comparison and I would urge anyone else out there to at least give it a try, purely and simply because it's what you see on the screen that matters, and you must use you own judgement, regardless of the predefined norms or standards. I'm not interested in the mathematical precision, primarily because I don't have access to the program information, therefore I can't make any legitimate decision on the mathematical correctness of either mathod. All that I can say is that, In my experience, creating an AVI file first, does, at the end of the day, give a superior quality VCD copy. What more can I say ?! ....give it a try and make up your own minds. !!!!!
I wasn"t talking about the Conversion being lossless But the Frame serveing being Lossless..From DVD2AVI Via D2v file to Tmpgenc (Or AVISynth) is Lossless, But the Conversion to Mpeg is Never Lossless as there are Very few Lossless Compression methods...I"m Just saying that there is No way that Converting to ANY AVI format before converting to Mpeg will achieve better Quality than doing Lossless Frameserveing directly to the Encoder and if you Believe that to Create Better Quality you have to produce lower Quality Video which is what you are doing, Is Totally rediculous...but of Cource your Perception is a bit clouded because you are defending a method that any Video Profecinal would scoff at, and I would get Fired for But it is Your method and you Like the Results , since you are Odviously not a Video Profecinal but you seem to be happy with it and Is all that Really matters....Well Lets Just stop this Because it is Like teaching someone that 1+1=2 not 4, and no Matter how much Logic I throw at you you will still Defend your extremely Lossy Conversion method....Well Good Luck anyways PS: your Conversion to AVI would be Mostly Lossless if you tried useing the HuffuUV Codec, But you Probably won"t try it...
