Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > MPEG-2 Encoding

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 8th June 2008, 01:25   #1  |  Link
plonk420
amd & h.264 fanboy
 
plonk420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NTSC
Posts: 412
Preferred mpeg-2 encoder 2007 and beyond?

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...

Last edited by Guest; 17th June 2008 at 13:20.
plonk420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2008, 01:58   #2  |  Link
45tripp
Dolphin Blue
 
45tripp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by plonk420 View Post
well, obviously for those with deep pockets CCE seems to be "the best",
is it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by plonk420 View Post
but is MEncoder still the preferred encoder for DVD-Spec MPEG-2?
still?

Quote:
Originally Posted by plonk420 View Post
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

Quote:
Originally Posted by plonk420 View Post
or is it content dependent?
isn't everything?
some people take one encoder over another based on scenario.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plonk420 View Post
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.
__________________
injected with feelings; with no final fading
45tripp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2008, 03:30   #3  |  Link
plonk420
amd & h.264 fanboy
 
plonk420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NTSC
Posts: 412
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 (which didn't have any "accountability") liked it as well as the classic VCDHelp comparison 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.
plonk420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2008, 03:51   #4  |  Link
45tripp
Dolphin Blue
 
45tripp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by plonk420 View Post
CCE supposedly good?
it's good.
but the "scene" can keep "best"


Quote:
Originally Posted by plonk420 View Post
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
__________________
injected with feelings; with no final fading
45tripp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2008, 12:19   #5  |  Link
PhillipWyllie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 211
CCE Basic isn't that dear, it's comparable to TMPEGEnc.
__________________
Specs: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600(4*2.4GHz), Win XP Pro SP2, 2 Gb DDR2, 1*120Gb HDD, 1*500Gb HDD
PhillipWyllie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2008, 13:16   #6  |  Link
45tripp
Dolphin Blue
 
45tripp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 336
true,
but one eventually misses SP functionality
__________________
injected with feelings; with no final fading
45tripp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th June 2008, 21:08   #7  |  Link
plonk420
amd & h.264 fanboy
 
plonk420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NTSC
Posts: 412
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)
plonk420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2008, 04:23   #8  |  Link
45tripp
Dolphin Blue
 
45tripp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by plonk420 View Post
i guess i'll have to do tests myself...
yep,
and i'd wager you'll end up with HC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plonk420 View Post
(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.
__________________
injected with feelings; with no final fading
45tripp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2008, 02:14   #9  |  Link
Blue_MiSfit
Derek Prestegard IRL
 
Blue_MiSfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,280
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 SP doesn't...

~MiSfit
Blue_MiSfit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2008, 10:17   #10  |  Link
G_M_C
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_MiSfit View Post
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 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
G_M_C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2008, 21:40   #11  |  Link
kempodragon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Biddeford, Me USA
Posts: 142
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.
kempodragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th June 2008, 07:00   #12  |  Link
video_magic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 368
For the last two years HC Encoder has been my favourite. Prior to that it was HC Encoder and Quenc.
__________________
Thankyou!, I am grateful for any help
video_magic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2008, 20:43   #13  |  Link
jfcarbel
Programmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 480
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
jfcarbel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2008, 23:18   #14  |  Link
PhillipWyllie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_MiSfit View Post
Y...features of SP (like segment based re-encoding)...
SP doesn't do SRE, that's the even more expensive Presto.
__________________
Specs: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600(4*2.4GHz), Win XP Pro SP2, 2 Gb DDR2, 1*120Gb HDD, 1*500Gb HDD
PhillipWyllie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2008, 19:47   #15  |  Link
Wodan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8
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
Wodan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2008, 22:15   #16  |  Link
blutach
Country Member
 
blutach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: is everything!
Posts: 6,499
Can I quote from rule 12 please, because it is very pertinent to this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by R12
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
__________________
Les

Only use genuine Verbatim or Taiyo Yuden media.
blutach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2008, 23:14   #17  |  Link
Ranguvar
Registered User
 
Ranguvar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ::1
Posts: 1,236
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.
Ranguvar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 19:14.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.