CVD format - better than SVCD ?

[kydongau]

There is an article on vcdhelp
"CVD:What is it,how to test it & what to expect!"

Quite interesting. It basically says, use CVD format instead of SVCD, the quality is comparable or better? with smaller size file.

Does the resize "cvd option" on dvd2svcd produces this format ? Anyone ?
I may try this out.

Cheers

[RadicalEd]

from the latest DVD2SVCD readme file (still in development)
- Enhancement: Added support for the DVD Half Width size (also called XSVCD size) 352 * 480/576.

I guess that would be what you mean (speaking of which, DVD2SVCD, you might want to change it to CVD or 1/2 D1 instead of XSVCD size, just a suggestion ^^; )

At any rate, yea I too read that article and despite previous doubts I'm beginning to really support CVD as opposed to SVCD. I realized the potential of it a lil while ago when I was stuck with a bitrate of 1300 for an animated movie. The solution to that was a bunch of filters and CVD res with overscan cropped (12,16,12,16 instead of 16 all around for CVD) and it worked like magic. CVD has a pretty strong argument against SVCD with the main points as;

- 1/2 D1 or D2 res which is compliant with DVD-Video
- Higher bit : pixel ratio
- Supported by as many players as SVCD

plus the way I figure if I'm gonna be using CVD subs I might as well do the rest CVD ::shrug:: but thats just me. The fact that a CVD at 2500 kbps is ~ to D1 DVD quality is pretty cool too (it works, 1/2 of 5000 kbps). So yea, CVD is pretty cool after all and I don't see any good reason not to use it, perhaps someone will bring up a valid counterpoint in this thread, should be interesting.

[avdmb]

@RadicalEdI guess that would be what you mean (speaking of which, DVD2SVCD, you might want to change it to CVD or 1/2 D1 instead of XSVCD size, just a suggestion ^^; ) Done : in Beta24, the 352*576/480 format is called CVD in the menu.

[RadicalEd]

Ha, you know what? I missed a new version of DVD2SVCD while I was gone. 1.0.9 build 3 is what you guys have all been referring to and I was stuck with build 2. Owell, I have it now so all is well I suppose.

[stanleycup]

A couple of quick questions on this new format (CVD 352x480)
in the new 1.09B3:

1) When I encode in DVD2SVCD, do I use the same settings as if I
used the 480x480 setting as described in Doom's guide?

2) I suppose the CVD format is still incompatible with DVD players
do not not support SVCD since this is still a MPEG-2 encoded file

3) What is the feedback from this format? Is the quality better
than 480x480?

Thanks for the help

[Daagar]

Correct, it would still be a mpeg2 file, so your DVD player may not accept it. However, there is a strong change you could use the 'svcd to vcd trick' as it is called, and have it play just fine. I'm not sure why the quality would be better except for the fact you have less pixels to spread the bitrate around in...

[Holomatrix]

Daager and StanleyCup - have you guy's read this yet; http://forum.vcdhelp.com/userguides/98177.php

[SatStorm]

There is a great problem with CVD, I discover during tests...

Most of NTSC DVD standalones, are not that compatible with CVD. The reason is simply: Those players don't have to be compatible with this format, because they are for US market. US market are R1 while Europe/china is R2. So, NTSC R1 DVD standalones don't have to be compatible with CVD, only philips' SVCD.
European PAL R2 standalones from the other hand, there are also (in theory) for use in China, so they have to be CVD compatible...

The conclusion is simply: If you are in US, buy a made in china DVD standalone if you want compatibility with CVD

From the other hand, ALL 352 X 480 mpeg 2 files gonna play on DVD-R discs... Silly isn't it?

[Holomatrix]

Ok, if anybody wants to know that have an APEX DVD player it play's them. Maybe APEX is made in china :)

[RadicalEd]

I think Apex is made in china actually...
but Sharp isn't and they play 'em fine.

[ux-3]

I just did a few test encodes from a b/w 4:3 full screen DVD.
The results were interesting. I did all encodes at a max average rate of 2000, to have a fair comparison. I did the encodes at CVD-, SVCD-, and DVD-resolution. I just took a look at them on TV. There was little difference among them. DVD seemed most sharp, but a bit flat, while CVD seemed a little coarse, but richer in contast.
I will ask my wife to help in a blind test (no pun intended), to see if I can quickly tell them apart.

Regarding the coding of B/W material, I was surprised that an hour episode of 4:3 full screen took only 1.9 GB VOB. Since I'll go to a CD-R90, I only compress by half. Is there a way to tell cce that only B/W is coming?

What resize algorithm makes most sense for CVD?

[paul8883]

Originally posted by RadicalEd
from the latest DVD2SVCD readme file (still in development)


The solution to that was a bunch of filters and CVD res with overscan cropped (12,16,12,16 instead of 16 all around for CVD) and it worked like magic. CVD has a pretty strong argument against SVCD with the main points as;


Hi RadicalEd, do you means it's better to add the overscan borders (12,16,12,16) in CVD? Cause I am looking for how to add the overscan borders for CVD. I did it for SVCD like (16,19,16,19) followed by some discussion in vcdhelp.

for dvd2svcd, thanks for adding the resize feature in your program, It's just great. Is it possible in the future release you provide the addborders feature too in order to avoid each time you must manually edit avs file if you want to add overscan borders.
Thx

[RadicalEd]

Well generally afaik you'd crop 16x16x16x16 pixels on each side to end up with 448x448 and the rest black overscan borders. Simple mathematics say that 16/480*352~12 so you end up with 328x448 for cropped CVD. Then again, I forgot completely about the 16 pixel macroblock rule.. eh.. well it seemed to work. I'll see if this is a problem and if theres a workaround when I get home in a few hours.

[RadicalEd]

Testing right now, 2 clips (well, the same clip resized differently)
the first 352x480 with borders of 12,16,12,16 and the second 480x480 borders 16,16,16,16
TMPG CQ mode, max bitrate 5000 kbps, min 0, quality 97

should be done in about a half an hour, will edit in the results

mkay, well, it would seem as though 12 pixels dosent hurt the encode at all (fortunately) the sizes were almost exactly the same. On top of that, I saw no blending between the 12 pixel black border and the movie, suggesting that 12 pixels is within safe range macroblock wise. Anybody with facts to the contrary please present them.