PDA

View Full Version : Preferred mpeg-2 encoder 2007 and beyond?


plonk420
8th June 2008, 01:25
well, obviously for those with deep pockets CCE seems to be "the best", but is MEncoder still the preferred encoder for DVD-Spec MPEG-2?

the most recent threads i see are from 2004-2005, including google searches... it seems that HEnc, Quenc (ffmpeg?), and assumably MEncoder still seem to be actively updated.

or is it content dependent? it seems that my previous fave, TMPGEnc 0.x-2.5x has fallen out of common discussion (and is pretty slow...) and possible use...

45tripp
8th June 2008, 01:58
well, obviously for those with deep pockets CCE seems to be "the best",

is it?

but is MEncoder still the preferred encoder for DVD-Spec MPEG-2?

still?


the most recent threads i see are from 2004-2005, including google searches... it seems that HEnc, Quenc (ffmpeg?), and assumably MEncoder still seem to be actively updated.

true


or is it content dependent?


isn't everything? :)
some people take one encoder over another based on scenario.


it seems that my previous fave, TMPGEnc 0.x-2.5x has fallen out of common discussion (and is pretty slow...) and possible use...

an ugly hog.

you've left out procoder and mainconcept.
i like procoder.

if you're experienced and happy with mencoder,
keep with it.

HC is the best starting point otherwise.
nothing to lose.
keeps getting better.

plonk420
8th June 2008, 03:30
bah, too lazy to do nested quoting...

CCE supposedly good? i'm sure "the scene" doesn't just use it because it's expensive (but then again they change standards quite slowly (once a year, i understand), and i don't have access to DVDR scene rules). hell, "they" use x264.

also this site (http://digitalcontentproducer.com/videoencodvd/revfeat/video_mpeg_encoder_shootout/) (which didn't have any "accountability") liked it as well as the classic VCDHelp comparison (http://www.videohelp.com/oldguides/comparison.htm#mpeg2) which is even older.



i've never used mencoder, but the MPEG-2 vs VC1 vs AVC comparison thread made me take note of it (but i haven't scoured the threads discussing mencoder making dvd-compliant video to determine if it makes legit streams or not) .. and i'm also going to look for a GUI (yes i'm a wuss) if i AM able to use it.

45tripp
8th June 2008, 03:51
CCE supposedly good?

it's good.
but the "scene" can keep "best"


threads discussing mencoder making dvd-compliant video to determine if it makes legit streams or not) .. and i'm also going to look for a GUI .

it's been known to work.

i can't think of an attractive gui..

try HC

PhillipWyllie
8th June 2008, 12:19
CCE Basic isn't that dear, it's comparable to TMPEGEnc.

45tripp
8th June 2008, 13:16
true,
but one eventually misses SP functionality

plonk420
9th June 2008, 21:08
i guess i'll have to do tests myself... (and yeah, i hear that if you're going to spend money, CCE Basic isn't really worth it)

45tripp
10th June 2008, 04:23
i guess i'll have to do tests myself...

yep,
and i'd wager you'll end up with HC.

(and yeah, i hear that if you're going to spend money, CCE Basic isn't really worth it)

it is.
you get the encoding engine.
it's just you might soon end up frustrated when needing an SP feature.
and HC has so many nice features.

Blue_MiSfit
17th June 2008, 02:14
Yeah, HC really impresses me. A lot. It may not have some of the more professional high-output features of SP (like segment based re-encoding), but as a conventional 2 pass MPEG-2 encoder (that's free), it's hard to beat!

Oh yeah, it does HD too :D SP doesn't...

~MiSfit

G_M_C
17th June 2008, 10:17
Yeah, HC really impresses me. A lot. It may not have some of the more professional high-output features of SP (like segment based re-encoding), but as a conventional 2 pass MPEG-2 encoder (that's free), it's hard to beat!

Oh yeah, it does HD too :D SP doesn't...

~MiSfit

And it has Variance AQ en luminance based adaptive matrix-shifting. Those impress me too, and setting them both to 1 gets almost perfect DVD's; Better than SP has ever done for me :)

kempodragon
17th June 2008, 21:40
I recently tried HC and quite frankly it is one of the sweetest MPEG-2 encoders I've come across. It's quality and speed make it my choice for encoding Huffyuv TV caps to DVD.

video_magic
18th June 2008, 07:00
For the last two years HC Encoder has been my favourite. Prior to that it was HC Encoder and Quenc.

jfcarbel
21st June 2008, 20:43
From my experience, it seems ProCoder is the best for interlaced home video content and CCE is tops for progressive.

And for H.264 its the open source x.264 thats the best quality

PhillipWyllie
21st June 2008, 23:18
Y...features of SP (like segment based re-encoding)...
SP doesn't do SRE, that's the even more expensive Presto.

Wodan
30th June 2008, 19:47
HC encoder doesnt do as good as cce sp and procoder on very high compression...but then again both of those are commercial and very expensive...but hc encoder is better than cce basic :)

blutach
30th June 2008, 22:15
Can I quote from rule 12 please, because it is very pertinent to this thread.

Each and everyone has their own view about what's best in a certain area. The best is what works best for you!
Now, that we should be back on track, I'd echo G_M_C's comments in post 10 about Lumgain and AQ (I use 2 and 1), which has really improved encoding low BR scenes in HCEnc. As 45tripp says, it just keeps getting better (and you can't beat the price).

Regards

Ranguvar
30th June 2008, 23:14
I use HCenc because I can't tell a difference between it and CCE usually (sometimes one seems better, sometimes the other, although I've never done a very low-bitrate encode), and I like supporting free software.