yetanotherid
16th December 2008, 05:13
I've recently been doing a bit of comparison converting using the two different resizing options in AutoGK (default and UTI). As a result, I noticed that AutoGK doesn't always produce a video of the advertised resolution. However, when comparing the converted video to the original, especially when using the default resize method, this seems to be a good thing.
For example at one stage when using one of the resizing methods (default I think) I was running two pass encoding while slightly increasing the file size each time. AutoGK told me it'd produce a 720x304 each time. The first time the quality was a little low. When I increased the file size for the second conversion quality was better. When I increased it a third time AutoGK told me the quality would be lower again because I was now getting a 720x320 AVI. So I increased it a forth time to achieve a 720x320 AVI of better quality. Only thing is, every AVI AutoGK produced was still in fact only 720x304.
Then during some more testing on a different video I seemed to get results somewhat "opposite" to the first ones.
I converted a different video once using each resizing method. The resulting AVIs were, according to AutoGK, 720x304. The conversion using the UTI resize method was, but the conversion using the default method was 720x320. When playing the original video and comparing it to the converted videos, the incorrectly labelled AVI, the one using the default resize method, seemed to be pretty much identical to the original. So to my way of thinking the fact that I got an AVI of the "wrong" resolution using the default resizing method was a good thing. The UTI resized AVI looked a little vertically "squished".
For the record.... I used the Nero media player, Windows Media Player and Media Player Classic to look at each video to confirm each was being displayed the same way by all three players. They were, so either all three players display the video correctly, or they all get it the same sort of wrong. I then used Media Player Classic (and ffdshow) to compare the AVIs with each other and the original.
Why does AutoGK advertise one resolution, but sometimes produce an AVI with a slightly different one? And why so far has that appeared to be a good thing, at least when it comes to producing an AVI that's the same aspect ratio as the original?
That brings me to the next.... I'm going to open the can of worms.... question. I've read a few threads now explaining why the UTI resize method is better than whatever the default method is, only I'm not seeing it. Every conversion I've done using both methods has given the same results. The AVI produced by the default resize method looks closer to the original. Even when the resolution is the same regardless of which resizing method was used, the UTI method always seems to introduce some type of "distortion". So why do people recommend using it?
Thanks.
For example at one stage when using one of the resizing methods (default I think) I was running two pass encoding while slightly increasing the file size each time. AutoGK told me it'd produce a 720x304 each time. The first time the quality was a little low. When I increased the file size for the second conversion quality was better. When I increased it a third time AutoGK told me the quality would be lower again because I was now getting a 720x320 AVI. So I increased it a forth time to achieve a 720x320 AVI of better quality. Only thing is, every AVI AutoGK produced was still in fact only 720x304.
Then during some more testing on a different video I seemed to get results somewhat "opposite" to the first ones.
I converted a different video once using each resizing method. The resulting AVIs were, according to AutoGK, 720x304. The conversion using the UTI resize method was, but the conversion using the default method was 720x320. When playing the original video and comparing it to the converted videos, the incorrectly labelled AVI, the one using the default resize method, seemed to be pretty much identical to the original. So to my way of thinking the fact that I got an AVI of the "wrong" resolution using the default resizing method was a good thing. The UTI resized AVI looked a little vertically "squished".
For the record.... I used the Nero media player, Windows Media Player and Media Player Classic to look at each video to confirm each was being displayed the same way by all three players. They were, so either all three players display the video correctly, or they all get it the same sort of wrong. I then used Media Player Classic (and ffdshow) to compare the AVIs with each other and the original.
Why does AutoGK advertise one resolution, but sometimes produce an AVI with a slightly different one? And why so far has that appeared to be a good thing, at least when it comes to producing an AVI that's the same aspect ratio as the original?
That brings me to the next.... I'm going to open the can of worms.... question. I've read a few threads now explaining why the UTI resize method is better than whatever the default method is, only I'm not seeing it. Every conversion I've done using both methods has given the same results. The AVI produced by the default resize method looks closer to the original. Even when the resolution is the same regardless of which resizing method was used, the UTI method always seems to introduce some type of "distortion". So why do people recommend using it?
Thanks.