MPEG2 or MP4 for 2 CD movies?

[U977]

Hi gents,

A colleague of mine said that the quality we can obtain is better when using SVCD than when using a DivX/XviD codec.

Here is the context: I put most of the movies I produce on 2 CDs to obtain the best quality I can obtain, using DivX 3.11, or DivX 5.02, or XviD (depending on my mood ;-) ). I have a width resolution between 504 and 640, I never want to get lower than that.

Do you think I should use SVCDs instead, if I don't mind using at least 2 CDs for a movie? Is the maximum quality taht we can obtain better?

Thks :-)

[bb]

No, SVCD quality will be worse, but you can play SVCD in many DVD standalone players.

bb

[neo_sapien]

I disagree. Assuming that you give the SVCD a high bitrate (1.75Mbps+ avg.), MPEG-2 is sharper, whereas DivX/XviD are smoother. If you're going for uber quality and bits are no object, go for SVCD. If you're doing a 1 or 2 CD rip and thus are constrained in your bitrate, do an MPEG-4 rip.

However, these are your rips, and the only person who can really tell you what quality you like the best is you. Do sample encodes and judge for yourself. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, and ultimately it's up to you to balance them out and decide which to go with.

[bb]

Sorry, neo_sapien, but your statement is definitely wrong. We are talking about standard-conforming SVCDs, right? Even if you max out the video bitrate of SVCDs at the cost of audio quality, you can't get higher than ~2748 kbps (which is audio + video max bitrate). Assumed you use 224 kbps audio, then your video is limited to ~2524 kbps (standard TMPGEnc setting is 2520 kbps).

These numbers given, you will get mosquito noise around sharp edges and blocks where fast movement occurs. The only way to avoid this is to smooth the video - and that's what encoders usually do to get better quality.

An MPEG-4 video at 2000 kbps will result in a much better picture without mosquitos / blocks.

Using MPEG-4 you get the same or even better quality using half the number of CDs, compared to SVCD.

bb

[symonjfox]

It's true.

A 2000 kbs MP4 is a very very good movie, very closed to DVD quality.

A 2000 kbs SVCD/CVD is quite good, but take in mind that SVCD has a resolution of 480*576 (PAL), while a 2000 kbs MP4 is very good also at higher resolutions (720*576).

[neo_sapien]

Originally posted by neo_sapien
If you're going for uber quality and bits are no object, go for SVCD. If you're doing a 1 or 2 CD rip and thus are constrained in your bitrate, do an MPEG-4 rip.

Originally posted by bb
An MPEG-4 video at 2000 kbps will result in a much better picture without mosquitos / blocks.

Originally posted by symonjfox
It's true.

A 2000 kbs MP4 is a very very good movie, very closed to DVD quality.

A 2000 kbs SVCD/CVD is quite good, but take in mind that SVCD has a resolution of 480*576 (PAL), while a 2000 kbs MP4 is very good also at higher resolutions (720*576).

Apparently you've misconstrued my statement to mean that I believe MPEG-2 is better than MPEG-4 on an equal playing field. That's not what I was trying to say. I know that a 2Mbps MPEG-4 (or even a 1.4Mbps MP4, for that matter) will beat the crap out of a 2Mbps MPEG-2. Take LOTR for example. A 4-CD SVCD rip @ 2.2Mbps is quite a nice, sharp thing to behold, compared to a 2-CD 920kbps MPEG-4 rip, which is basically blur city in comparison, even in SBC.

Furthermore, even the MPEG-2 mosquito noise is better than its MPEG-4 cousin. Give me the choice between MPEG-2 mosquito noise/blocks or MPEG-4 mosquito noise/blocks/blurs and I'll choose MPEG-2 any day, and twice on Sunday. The video generated by a ~2Mbps MPEG-2 is far more organic (and by organic I mean DVD-looking) looking than an MPEG-4 at 33% or 50% of that bitrate, even if the MP4 is maxed out at a low-bitrate quant 2.

MPEG-2 can be made to look much better than MPEG-4, provided that it has about 200% more bits to work with.

[-h]

The mosquito noise is identical in MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 if you want it to be, since they have identical quantization methods.

MPEG-4 is superior to MPEG-2 in basically every way, it's just the encoders that haven't caught up yet. TMPGEnc uses several non-configurable tricks such as motion masking and luminance correction to increase apparent quality.

-h

[neo_sapien]

Originally posted by -h
MPEG-4 is superior to MPEG-2 in basically every way, it's just the encoders that haven't caught up yet.

I would agree, if not for that godawful blur (even at quant 2). MPEG-2 is nice and sharp, given a high enough bitrate.

[-h]

I would agree, if not for that godawful blur (even at quant 2). MPEG-2 is nice and sharp, given a high enough bitrate.

Have you tried MPEG quantization instead of H.263?

-h

[neo_sapien]

EDIT~Double post, please delete. Sorry.

[neo_sapien]

I have. I have a 3-CD rip of LOTR (w/DD 5.1 track) using XviD with MPEG quantization, and a 4-CD SVCD rip of the movie. Both rips were done using Simple Resize, the bitrate on the XviD copy was 1155kbit/s, and the SVCD was done with 2217kbit/s. The comp test on the XviD copy was 56% I believe, and I wasn't using b-frames. The XviD copy was sharp compared to H.263, but it wasn't nearly as sharp as the SVCD.

I've done a lot of XviD rips with MPEG quant, and the last 5 or so were new mod hq.

[bb]

neo_sapien, I still don't get your point. If you want to compare your 4-CD SVCD rip with an equivalent using XviD, you should talk about a 4-CD XviD rip as well - using the same audio bitrate, too.

Else I could insist on comparing your SVCDs to a beautiful 100-CD Huffyuv rip with outstanding sharpness...

bb

[Fairlight Excalibur]

I have a 2cd rip I made of LOTR using Nandub and the quality is Stunning and when viewed on my TV people think there watching the DVD ;)

[Stampede]

@Fairlight Excalibur
I too have done well creating a nice looking encode of LOTR on 2 CD's but I think it would be stretching the truth saying it looks just like the DVD even on a TV. My average quant was around 3.5 using DivX 5.02 at 640 resolution. There are a few spots with severe macroblocks still in a small number of locations. Check out Arwen's right cheek in the sequence running from 1h25m16s to 1h25m54s and see if you have the same issues at that location. I'm not sure if XVid fairs much better.

[Acaila]

I'm not sure if XviD fairs much better.I've ordered the extended version that's shipping the coming week. So I'll know in a short while how XviD does the job :)

[neo_sapien]

I take it back-XviD is indeed sharp as hell, just give it Quant 2 and MPEG quantization :D