Doom9's Forum - View Single Post

Eric Tetz · 1st July 2003, 17:15

"Well in terms of sharing files, there are MAJOR issues of storage and bandwidth, sadly!"

I have 80 megs of Yahoo! Briefcase space, which is more than enough to compare like 10 seconds of footage, right? If anyone has suggestions on what good test footage should include, or if they have some appropriate footage already, let me know.

If 80 megs is not enough, I will gladly pay for more storage space. I would love to post the source file and say "have at it, give me your best DVD-compatible encode of this" and see what the CCE gurus can produce.

"I don't claim to have all the answers on this topic - as you are no doubt aware, there was an extremely extensive discussion here"

I read that, and it was pretty much the same. No general agreement.

"there are mitigating factors, many of which you will find mentioned in the above thread. There are indeed differences between the encoders, and some are better at one type of encoding and vice versa - I do not dispute this. It's just that I do not think CCE should be written of so broadly or severely - it is an extremely capable encoder."

CCE hasn't been written off! Notice that this message board has a TMPGenc and CCE forum, but no ProCoder forum. People jump through flaming hoops to get good results out of CCE, yet write-off ProCoder because it is "probably cheating". It just doesn't make any sense to me.

"I don't doubt that CCE has uses to certain professionals and given its extensive array of options and plugins I'm sure that professionals prefer that sort of action in an application. But for the casual home user, there are better and easier choices out there that produce exceptional results without having to take a college course in it to get it to work."

For the record, that's not my position at all. I'll gladly take a college course in it, if it will deliver the goods: super high quality encodes. In reality, it's not that complex, certainly less complex than TMPGenc. It's just that the results I've seen with NTSC DV have been pretty poor.

1st July 2003, 17:15	#17 \| Link
Eric Tetz Registered User Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 6	"Well in terms of sharing files, there are MAJOR issues of storage and bandwidth, sadly!" I have 80 megs of Yahoo! Briefcase space, which is more than enough to compare like 10 seconds of footage, right? If anyone has suggestions on what good test footage should include, or if they have some appropriate footage already, let me know. If 80 megs is not enough, I will gladly pay for more storage space. I would love to post the source file and say "have at it, give me your best DVD-compatible encode of this" and see what the CCE gurus can produce. "I don't claim to have all the answers on this topic - as you are no doubt aware, there was an extremely extensive discussion here" I read that, and it was pretty much the same. No general agreement. "there are mitigating factors, many of which you will find mentioned in the above thread. There are indeed differences between the encoders, and some are better at one type of encoding and vice versa - I do not dispute this. It's just that I do not think CCE should be written of so broadly or severely - it is an extremely capable encoder." CCE hasn't been written off! Notice that this message board has a TMPGenc and CCE forum, but no ProCoder forum. People jump through flaming hoops to get good results out of CCE, yet write-off ProCoder because it is "probably cheating". It just doesn't make any sense to me. "I don't doubt that CCE has uses to certain professionals and given its extensive array of options and plugins I'm sure that professionals prefer that sort of action in an application. But for the casual home user, there are better and easier choices out there that produce exceptional results without having to take a college course in it to get it to work." For the record, that's not my position at all. I'll gladly take a college course in it, if it will deliver the goods: super high quality encodes. In reality, it's not that complex, certainly less complex than TMPGenc. It's just that the results I've seen with NTSC DV have been pretty poor.