onisama
23rd May 2003, 07:51
I'm sure people have tried this before, but I was wondering myself what kind of results I could get from each different encoder. I tried CCE 2.5, Canopus Procoder 1.01.35, and TMPG 2.5. The AVS was the same for all three:
Telecide(guide=1,gthresh=50,chroma=true,threshold=30)
Decimate(cycle=5)
TemporalSmoother(2,1)
BicubicResize(480,480,0.0,0.6)
And the settings for each are (everything else is default):
CCE:
4 pass VBR, Image qulaity - 26, Noise reduction - 6
Procoder:
2 pass VBR, mastering quality
TMPG:
2 pass VBR, soften block noise - 40 & 40
The video length was 48 seconds.
-- CCE took 8 min, 57 sec
-- Procoder took 9 min, 34 sec
-- TMPG took 6 min, 11 sec (that doesn't seem right, it should be slower than the other two?)
If you extrapolate that to a 25 minute video, you get (if extrapolation/conversion is accurate in comparison to a real 25 minute video encoding session):
-- CCE: 4 hrs. 40 min
-- Procoder: 4 hrs. 59 min
-- TMPG: 3 hrs. 13 min
My past experience with tmpg has been different than this test, usually tmpg it took almost 1.5 - 2 times as long as cce.
Here is a portion from a screenshot of each:
cce - http://meisenheimerphoto.com/stuff/video%20samples/cce.jpg
procoder - http://meisenheimerphoto.com/stuff/video%20samples/procoder.jpg
tmpg - http://meisenheimerphoto.com/stuff/video%20samples/tmpg.jpg
You'll notice tmpg looks terrible (lots of block noise), but cce and procoder are comparable. I actually think cce looks a little better.
Maybe this will help someone to decide what encoder to use, I think I'll stick with cce.
Telecide(guide=1,gthresh=50,chroma=true,threshold=30)
Decimate(cycle=5)
TemporalSmoother(2,1)
BicubicResize(480,480,0.0,0.6)
And the settings for each are (everything else is default):
CCE:
4 pass VBR, Image qulaity - 26, Noise reduction - 6
Procoder:
2 pass VBR, mastering quality
TMPG:
2 pass VBR, soften block noise - 40 & 40
The video length was 48 seconds.
-- CCE took 8 min, 57 sec
-- Procoder took 9 min, 34 sec
-- TMPG took 6 min, 11 sec (that doesn't seem right, it should be slower than the other two?)
If you extrapolate that to a 25 minute video, you get (if extrapolation/conversion is accurate in comparison to a real 25 minute video encoding session):
-- CCE: 4 hrs. 40 min
-- Procoder: 4 hrs. 59 min
-- TMPG: 3 hrs. 13 min
My past experience with tmpg has been different than this test, usually tmpg it took almost 1.5 - 2 times as long as cce.
Here is a portion from a screenshot of each:
cce - http://meisenheimerphoto.com/stuff/video%20samples/cce.jpg
procoder - http://meisenheimerphoto.com/stuff/video%20samples/procoder.jpg
tmpg - http://meisenheimerphoto.com/stuff/video%20samples/tmpg.jpg
You'll notice tmpg looks terrible (lots of block noise), but cce and procoder are comparable. I actually think cce looks a little better.
Maybe this will help someone to decide what encoder to use, I think I'll stick with cce.