Quality is a world of difference

[brashquido]

Hi All,

I've finally overcome my most problem filled conversion using the big three :D . It's no Matrix conversion, but The Minority Report has loads of content and at 2hr 20 minutes, is very long. Plus I had a weird DTS track naming problem along the way with DIF4U. Anyway, along with the 140 minute video track there are 1 x 448kbps 5.1 channel AC-3(460MB), 2 x 192 2 channel AC-3's (195MB each), 1 x 754 DTS (770MB) and a 590MB worth of menu's. This only left about 2.2GB for the video, which equated to about bitrate of 2100kbps in CCE.

Obviously this wasn't going to produce DVD quality video, so I stripped 192kbps audio tracks, and (against what I'd usually do ) re-encoded the 448kbps 5.1 track down to 320kbps. All this gained me an extra 520MB which allowed me to raise the video bitrate to 2600kbps. Still not great, but the quality difference was quite noticable in the problem sections I identified with the 2100kbps encode.

What impressed me most was that the i,age quality on my set top Pioneer 355. Even fram by frame I could not see any artifacts with the 2600kbps encode, whereas on my PC in PowerDVD XP the artifacts where quite pronounced. Just thought I'd share :D :cool: .

[ShaneZ]

Monitor resolution is a lot higher than a TV will ever be. Things that are quite pronounced on your computer screen will blend in on a TV. Good to know that worked out for you. I have a few titles I have been putting off that I may try that on.

[Eyes`Only]

Thank God someone else sees this. People are whining about 2500-2600 bitrates all the time, and I can't understand why. If you have a decent source to begin with, and a good settop, you can't see any of the artifacts that you see on the monitor on your TV. I have tested this with friends' HUGE widescreen TVs, and they absolutely love to see my backups, as they can't tell the difference!

I'm doing a backup at 2501 right now, I've tested the source and it is excellent so I have no question that my encode will be quality also.

btw: you must really love your DTS! :D

[brashquido]

Yeah, even if you lower your desktop resolution (800x600 or less) on your PC, less artifacts are produced. The only people I can imagine being effected by sub 3000kbps encodes are those using a combination of a HTPC, and a projector with a XGA or better native resolution.

The section of footage I mainly used to scan for artifacts was a section looking down a hallway with almost pure white walls with half a dozen men in black suits running up it. A good combination of extreme contrast and fast moving objects. At 2600kbps, the men still had slight halo effects, but it was far better than the 2100kbps encode where there was quite a large dirty ring around them as they moved.

And yes, I do like DTS :D, some swear by DD and some DTS, I like both. From what I've used I think DTS seems to have a better sound quality and surround effect, but that also may come from being encoded at 754kbps whereas most DD 5.1 tracks are encoded 448kbps. After all, cinema audio is as far as I know a 640kbps DD 5.1 track. Besides I always like to keep atleast 2 audio tracks if I can.

[VerbaL]

Thanks for this report brashquido!

I'm finishing off the Almost Famous Director's Cut now at a bitrate of ~2500. I wasn't feeling too sure about that because most people trash that kind of bitrate.

If I would strip the extras, I would maybe get it up to 2700 or even 2900. But for this DVD, I just can't do that. I had to strip the DTS track though :(

Normally I would prefer DTS over DD because of my home cinema system, but in this case I just couldn't keep it. And to be honest DD will do just fine for this movie because it doesn't contain a lot of action.

Eyes already told me he got some good results at those bitrates and now you seem to confirm that. That makes me a little more confident about doing these kinds of bitrates :D

Greetz,
verb

* Update *
Just finished the backup and I must say...quality is excellent!

[Jin Kazama]

Well,
I just did minority report R2 with a bitrate of 3512 and when I watched the video I saw some artifacts from time to time... I just "investigated this problem" and noticed the source had artifacts too...

I can't beleive that even now, they can fail to make good quality DVDs... (and the menu was also awful).

I think I'll wait to have a "deluxe" or "remastered" version next time I want to do a backup.

[bezerk]

I have XGA projector and I use HTPC for playing movies, cause I can calibrate it far better then my pioneer DVD 444 standalone.

I did a couple of movies, at low bitrate about 2500kbit/s (2 movies per DVD), when I didn't own a projector. They look flawless on TV, really great, but there are quite a few encoding artifacts present (with projector) in hard to encode sections of the movie, like sky scenes....anyway, if you want to, you can really see encoding artifacts most of the time, but not very distracting.

I used to encode DVDs to divx, then I bought a DVD player, gave my divx's to someone and encoded to VCD for a while. then I encoded SVCD's for a while, bought a DVD burner and did some 2 movie DVDs, then I bought a projector gave alllllll that away and now I only do
"proper" backups, no menu's, DD5.1 - only 1 track, 3 subtitles at most, and usualy 8 pass in CCE, but I must admit IC7 is quite good at very high percentage.
I will not give all my backups away when I buy a HDTV projector or..... at least not for a while, they are very good !
think about it...

[brashquido]

Hey bezerk,

I thought as much. I have a Dreamvision Starlight DL500 projector which only has a native SVGA display, so these high res artifacts aren't too much of a problem for me. I wonder what a dedicated image scaler would be like in comparison to a HTPC. Then again, if you can afford a decent scaler, you can afford to buy 2 copies of every DVD :p .

Anyway, I was wondering if these artifacts that only really show at high res could be reduced by a filter? Can I ask what software DVD player you use on your HTPC, and also what videocard and driver revision?

[bezerk]

Hi

I have Acer DLP projector, My HTPC is AMD 1700+@3000+, Leadtek Geforce 4Ti 4200, 512Mb RAM. I use only WinDVD platinum. My driver version is 6.13.10.4041 from nvidia. Filters can not do miracles, once information is lost, there is no way to get it back, you can smooth the picture, but then details and sharpness are gone.
Try to calibrate you projector with something like AVIA setup disc,
calibration does wonders !!!!

[brashquido]

They can't do miracles, but they can help. Depending one the severity of the problem of course, obviously there is no chance on turning a dodgy VCD into full DVD quality. Also as you state, projector calibration (particularly those not aimed at HT) can gain a lot in image quality.

[Sn8kbordin]

I have Mitsu Platinum 65" w/ Samsung DVD player connected via DVI.
On this setup 2000kbps is very low rate and there is a lot of artifacts (well it depends on the scene), but for me 2500 is too low.

[Pfc Joker]

Thank God someone else sees this. People are whining about 2500-2600 bitrates all the time, and I can't understand why. If you have a decent source to begin with, and a good settop, you can't see any of the artifacts that you see on the monitor on your TV

:D Ok Eyes, would I be correct if I was to say that; If I can't see any artifacts on my 19" Viewsonic P95f+ monitor, the chances of seeing any on my 35" Sony TV are slim to none?

[jel]

depends on yer state of mind at the time (says mr j in his mock Eyes`Only voice)
of course meaning no harm to either of the intended parties..only crap humour in the face of a late night out...:D (cos all i can do is grin...)
but no...seriously, i think you would be pretty safe.
i notice some (very minor) artifacts on my lowly 17inch tft monitor with even the movies that i re-encode at 4000 kbit/s yet it looks perfect on my stand-alone....

[Master Yoda]

You may notice artifacts on a monitor, but they may not show up on a tv as a monitor has a higher resolution than what a tv does.

[Trahald]

yeah.. the dot pitch on monitors is usually way sharper than tvs.. besides the fact avg viewing distance on a monitor is less than 2 ft

2ft from your 35" you may see some mosquito noise.. but at viewing distance you normally wouldnt

blocking you can pretty much see at any distance since the block pattern is the same for ever frame.. just more or less intense per frame.

[Eyes`Only]

You actually have a Eyes`Only impression? Damn, that's scary. I can just imagine what people think I sound like compared to what I actually DO sound like. hehe

I didn't reply because I honestly don't like to get into long discussions about this topic.. it just results in a "well on my TV it does this.." and "well my TV doesn't ..." type of thread.

[Pfc Joker]

Well I appreciate the info none the less.

How does one go about making up an Eyes'Only impression?

[jel]

about 10 hours of solid drinking!
at this point everything is possible :rolleyes:
....

[Trahald]

lol