encoding in dvd resolution (with wm9)

[billou2k]

I've got several clips that I'd like to encode at their original resolution 720x576 for several reasons, one of them being that it is interlaced and I dont want to play with deinterlacers at all.
I've been playing with several codecs. but I ve discovered a few weird things:
- Wm9 vcm encoding in interlaced mode is way faster than in progressive mode (easily 5 times faster) is there any good reason for that? That seems weird, especially considering that divx or xvid dont have any significant difference in encoding time wether the video is progressive or not.

- Then I had a try with Windows Media encoder to see if it works the same way.. and actually it does. And on top of that I can see ffdshow launched when WM encoder is processing... Is it a normal procedure? Does wm encoder uses direct show to work rather than vfw like vdub. it means I could use any pp or noise filtering or anything that ffdshow can do as a preprocessing for the encoding?

-And the weirdest thing with wm encoder is that even with a progressive video when I set it to produce a local file with complex decoding etc.. it also produces it way faster than with the vcm codec in progressive mode in vdub...
Does wmencoder only doing real time encoding whatever the settings we use?

[Sagittaire]

Quality setting with WMEncoder is in Option. WMV9 Pro and WMA9 pro are very powerfull codecs for High quality encoding ... good choise

http://jfl1974.free.fr/Video/Gladiator-NTSC.wmv

WMV9 720*480*23.976 ~3 MBps
WMA9 5.1 ~224Kbps
source HDTV 1080i

Better quality than MPEG2 6-8 Mbps ... ;-)

[nFury8]

Originally posted by Sagittaire
Quality setting with WMEncoder is in Option. WMV9 Pro and WMA9 pro are very powerfull codecs for High quality encoding ... good choise
WMV9 Pro? Where did you get that? I can't find it in the WME9 video codec menu.
Originally posted by Sagittaire
Better quality than MPEG2 6-8 Mbps ... ;-)
With all due respect, straight-off subjective statements like this are an invitation to be ganged up on by the hardcore elite members here. Better duck and hide. :D

[Sagittaire]

WMV9 Pro? Where did you get that? I can't find it in the WME9 video codec menu.

It's for High Def profil
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs/video.aspx

Better quality than MPEG2 6-8 Mbps ... ;-)

I make the encoding in MPEG2 720*480 at 6 Mbps and quality is better with WMV9, MPEG4 or VP6 and ratio 2:1 ...
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs.aspx

Download my sample ... ;-)
http://jfl1974.free.fr/Video/Gladiator-NTSC.wmv

WM9 solution is very good. it's also for me the most complete soltution of encoding:

1) WMV9 codec
Very good codec. For me better than MPEG4 ASP (XviD and DivX). ASF, WMV, AVI and MKV compatibitity ...

2) WMA9 codec
Best Audio codec for me ...

3) WMEncoder or WMV9 VFW

4) WM9 Player

[McoreD]

Originally posted by nFury8
With all due respect, straight-off subjective statements like this are an invitation to be ganged up on by the hardcore elite members here. Better duck and hide. :D

Your above reply to Sagittaire exibits your unawareness of this page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs.aspx in Microsoft Windows Media Site.

@Sagittaire,
Can you please brief your steps for DVD ripping to WMV9?

My current way is:
1. Extracting the AC3 using DVD2AVIdg
2. Saving the *.d2v project (which accesses the VOB files)
3. Converting AC3 to 6 mono WAVs using BeSweet
4. Creating the *.avs file (which accesses the *.d2v)
5. Using WME9 to encode. video source: *.avs, audio source: 6 WAVs

I just want to make sure if I am missing any better alternative methods. And also, which MPEG2 Decoder and Demultiplexer are you using? I use the Intervideo Audio/Video for decoders and mpg2splt.ax for the Splitter/Demultiplexer. Thanks in advance.

[Sagittaire]

1. Extracting the AC3 and D2V project using DVD2AVI
2. Converting AC3 to OGG 5.1 using HeadAC3He (1500 Kbps ~LossLess)
3. Creating the *.avs file (which accesses the *.d2v)
4. Using WME9 to encode. video source: *.avs, audio source: Ogg 5.1
5. Using wmstreamedt for Multiaudio Stream WMV9 / WMA9 / WMV
5 bis. Using Graphedit and VirtualDubMod for WMV9 / WMA9 / SRT / MKV

Gladiator sample source is HDTV 1080i ... ;-)

[bond]

Originally posted by McoreD
Your above reply to Sagittaire exibits your unawareness of this page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs.aspx in Microsoft Windows Media Site.hahaha
till now i liked this thread but now i cant hold myself back :rolleyes:

is that test made by the same company which claims that wma9 delivers cd-quality @ 64kbps (or wait didnt they say @ 48kbps)?
marketing comparisons from companies count nothing! would anyone expect that there would be results which wouldnt show that wmv9 is the best thing everyone can ever imagine?

[Sagittaire]

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/wi...ies/codecs.aspx

For me ratio comparaison for WMV9/MPEG2 is correct (or MPEG4 ASP, VP6, RV10 and MPEG2). I make this test with HDTV 1080i source:

- MPEG2 CCE 4 pass 6 Mbps 720*480 MP@ML profil
- WMV9 3 Mbps 720*480 MP@ML profil

And visually I prefer WMV9. I can make a PSNR/SSIM Test if you want but a ratio 2:1 between ~MPEG4 and MPEG2 it's for me a good reference ... ;-)

@ Bond

Downloads my sample and done an opinion ...
http://jfl1974.free.fr/Video/Gladiator-NTSC.wmv
http://jfl1974.free.fr/Video/PP-WMV9.reg

WMV9 720*480*23.976 ~3 MBps
WMA9 5.1 ~224Kbps

I know perfectly all the solutions for current encoding:

- WMV9, RV10, VP6, MPEG4 ASP
- AAC, OGG, WMA9, MP3
- AVI, MKV, MP4, OGM, WMV

And for me the must complete solution is WM9 ...

[bond]

thanks i will check it out, but its hard to judge video quality wihtout a reference (the original), especially on such high bitrates :(

Originally posted by Sagittaire
And for me the must complete solution is WM9 ...how do you define complete?

[Sagittaire]

WM9 solution is very good. it's for me the most complete soltution of encoding:

1) WMV9 codec
Very good codec. For me better than MPEG4 ASP (XviD and DivX). WMV, AVI and MKV compatibitity ...

2) WMA9 codec
Best Audio codec for me ... WMV and MKV compatibility

3) WMEncoder or WMV9 VFW

4) WM9 Player

WMV9 / WMA9 / SRT / MKV is also compatible with VDM for edition ... ;-)

I like also MPEG4 ASP / LC-AAC / MP4 with bifs menu but too complicated to make and play. It's now simply with Nero but ND MPEG4 is very bad for MPEG4 ASP ...

[bond]

hm no, no need to discuss this whole thing once again, we will not convince each other :D

lets leave it at "everyone has his flaws" ;)

[nFury8]

I knew it. I knew where this is gonna lead to.:D

Originally posted by McoreD
Your above reply to Sagittaire exibits your unawareness of this page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs.aspx in Microsoft Windows Media Site.
Yes sir. I am more than aware of that link. But bond has already made the counterpoint, so I don't need to. I personally really got nothing against anyone using wmv9, in fact I use it for my own reasons. My original point is, these sort of things will always be subjective and all-too-conclusive statements will only draw reactions from some quarters. That's it. I better stop now before I get caught in the crossfire.:D

[McoreD]

For those who are willing to encode in WMV9 and are forced to leave the computer for hours without been able to do other work, there is a workaround for people with Pentium 4 Hyper threading.

Multitasking with Windows Media Encoder in a HTT enabled PC (http://microsoftusernetwork.com/mcored/knowledgebase/kb-htt.htm)

[Sagittaire]

Ctrl+alt+suppr and priority idle ... for all codec and all CPU ... ;-)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Well there is no doubt that WMV9 at DVD 'resolutions' (And bye the way, I hate using that word to describe image pixel frame sizes) is a very capable codec!

However, despite it being described as "the most complete soltution of encoding" I would not go that far.... And anyway encodings one thing. What about decoding (ie: viewing)?

At this present moment in time, in order to view your WMV9 encodes, it means you're stuck behind your PC monitor.... Where are all the stand-alone players that can be connected to big screens!

I would far rather spend 100 euros on a (Mpeg4) stand-alone player, that can connect to my TV, than shell-out 1500 euros on a 'Media Centre' PC!

Cheers

[Sagittaire]

WM9 or/and H264 for futur HD-DVD ... ?

WM9 in 720p for futur Chip Kiss platine ... ?

[bond]

guys, no need for "mine is bigger than yours" discussions, it leads to nothing ;)

[Sagittaire]

25 cm ... ;-)

[SeeMoreDigital]

10 inches... :D

[bond]

damn, only 5cm here ;)

[Latexxx]

Your cars are really small! :D My car is at least 3.5 m long.

[nFury8]

By the beard of Gandalf! This thread is going on a roller-coaster ride. But it's something that is measurable though. I have a feeling it will grow to an immense 'length'.

[Sagittaire]

Another demo for Fansuber: Sample Animatrix - Program

http://jfl1974.free.fr/Video/Animatrix.wmv
WMV9 720*576 1250 kbps
WMA9 Pro 5.1 160 Kbps

and another Codec Comparaison ... please Doom9 ... It really does not show the real quality of the codec... when I read that XviD 1.0 is the best codec I am very surprised ... ;-)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by Sagittaire
...and another Codec Comparaison ... please Doom9 ... It really does not show the real quality of the codec... when I read that XviD 1.0 is the best codec I am very surprised ... ;-) Agreed. A codec comparison using PAL and NTSC DVD image pixel frame sizes is a good idea. As I think it would produce different results to previous 'crop and resize' tests...

It would be great if Doom9 could oblige but given the quantity of work involved I would not expect such a comparison any time soon. Unless of course we were all able to help in some way!

Cheers

[Stebet]

Originally posted by billou2k
I've got several clips that I'd like to encode at their original resolution 720x576 for several reasons, one of them being that it is interlaced and I dont want to play with deinterlacers at all.

I was wondering about the part where you don't want to mess with deinterlacers. Are today's video cards capable of deinterlacing WM9 content (i thought that only applied to MPEG2)? I know mine doesn't (Geforce 4Ti)! Anyone have any more info on this?

[Stebet]

Scratch that. It seems my video card does deinterlace after all. I didn't shut down Windows Media Encoder before i tried playing the file and it seems it was keeping my card (or overlays) occupied with something else. After i shut down WME9 my interlaced WM9 content plays back deintarlaced just fine in WMP9. Quite cool! Now i wonder if there are any significant differences in encoding quality when encoding deinterlaced or interlaced? Anyone care to do some testing (My Athlon XP2000 is so damn slow :D)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by billou2k
I've got several clips that I'd like to encode at their original resolution 720x576 for several reasons, one of them being that it is interlaced and I dont want to play with deinterlacers at all. Just a general question, not just to billou2k.

Why do some people not want to de-interlace, interlaced video?

Cheers

[Latexxx]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
Just a general question, not just to billou2k.

Why do some people not want to de-interlace, interlaced video?

Cheers

Because deinterlacing real interlaced content means quality loss. Deinterlace/convert-to-50-Hz-and-resize-back-to-576 preserves more of the original content and doesn't cause deinterlacing artifacts.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by Latexxx
Because deinterlacing real interlaced content means quality loss. Deinterlace/convert-to-50-Hz-and-resize-back-to-576 preserves more of the original content and doesn't cause deinterlacing artifacts. I guess I should have been more specific.

Personally I would never de-interlace video to a smaller image pixel frame size than the interlaced source!

Cheers

[Demi9OD]

Is WME9 technically any better or newer than the VCM codec?

[McoreD]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
At this present moment in time, in order to view your WMV9 encodes, it means you're stuck behind your PC monitor.... Where are all the stand-alone players that can be connected to big screens!

I watch WMV9 in my 21" Sony Flatscreen!


Hint: XboX. ;)

[bond]

Originally posted by Demi9OD
Is WME9 technically any better or newer than the VCM codec? i somewhere read that vcm doesnt offer b-frames (avi doesnt like them)

maybe mcored can tell us more about the differences?

[Sagittaire]

WMV9 VCM Without Bframe and WMEncodeur with BFrame ...

pixel ratio for WMEncodeur not for WMV9 VCM ...

Hardware decoding profil for WMV9 VCM ...

[McoreD]

javascript:checklength(document.vbform);
There are many advantages in WME9 over WMV9 VCM :)

What Bond and Sagittaire said, plus:
Inverse Telecine
Encoding to WMA9 Pro and other WM audio formats ;)
Attributes support
External Plugin support (I sometimes use plugins from WinDVD)
Batch encoding (for non-2-pass VBR encodes)

WMV9 VCM has two options while resizing:
Bilinear and Bicubic (slow), I haven't seen these two options in WME9.

Since I choose the WMV file container, I always use Windows Media Encoder 9.

[Demi9OD]

Mcore, are B-frames always enabled or do you have to change something in the encoding properties?

If I choose to NOT use forced film in DVD2AVI (mixed content) Is there any reason to use WME9 to IVTC rather than avisynth? The "Auto Detect" option doesn't work with avs files, it returns some error message. I am also assuming if I IVTC in my script I should put the target framerate at 23.976 in WME9.

I will probably answer some of my own questions this afternoon when my first attempt at WME9 finishes encoding (Band of Brothers DVD1). I am splitting each disc of 2 eps into 2 CDs (about 50 minutes per CD) and figured using WM9 at full res would be the best option.

[Sagittaire]

No Bframe for WMV9 VCM but for me WMV9 VCM is better than WMVEncodeur for usual "DivX resolution" (~200 000 pixels)

WMEncodeur is very good for High Resolution encoding ...

[RadicalEd]

That's funny, I once ran tests WME v. WM VCM, and the results were pixel-for-pixel bit-for-bit identical. http://www.animemusicvideos.org/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_neutral.gif

[Sagittaire]

No identical result for PSNR test and visual test for me ...

[jflatt]

What triggers the WMV9 Pro codec? Having HD sized input like 1280x720? If thats the case, I can just resize my DVD source using a Lanczos method, and then let WME resize it down?

[McoreD]

@jflatt, WMV9 Pro codec is used by WME when encoding at higher bitrate (approx. 1400 Kbps +)
For example:
712 x 544 at 1450 Kbps gives me Windows Media Video 9 Professional

Windows Media Video 9 Professional
For content with ultra-high video quality WMV9 Pro defines profiles of the Windows Media Video 9 codec automatically applied at higher bit rates and resolutions. Its efficiency can bring high-definition quality to PC users, enabling storage and delivery of a complete movie at 720p resolution (1280 x 720 pixels per frame)
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs/video.aspx

@Demi9OD,

I haven't found any option in WME9 which let us to choose between bilinear and bicubic resizing.

I assume you got horizontal lines in playback and hence you why are trying to IVTC?

Here are some FYI:

"Only 30fps telecined from 24fps can be converted back to 24fps by IVTC.
If every frame is interlaced (most TV news and shows), we must apply deinterlace instead of IVTC."

"In WME9, the setting you specify in Frame Rate represents the maximum fps."

For testing purposes, encode in CBR and set the Limit by Duration to 2 minutes or so.

Try IVTC in WME9 and set it to Auto. If that doesn't solve the problem, you are left with IVTC by AviSynth.

I think you can also use AviSynth to specify the frame rate by using the command: AssumeFPS(24)

All the Best,
McoreD

[Demi9OD]

The encode worked fine using avisynth IVTC and 23.976fps set in WME9, just wondered if there would be a speed difference using the internal IVTC, I got around 3.6fps on the second pass, 3.45ghz P4.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by billou2k
I've got several clips that I'd like to encode at their original resolution 720x576 for several reasons, one of them being that it is interlaced and I dont want to play with deinterlacers at all.

Might I ask why? I admit there are some sources that should just not be deinterlaced. For instance those rare true interlace material. But when I think DVD I think movies and for that it is silly not to deinterlace. It does depend on your source. But you should familiarise yourself with deinterlacing techniques IMHO.

Originally posted by billou2k
I've been playing with several codecs. but I ve discovered a few weird things:
- Wm9 vcm encoding in interlaced mode is way faster than in progressive mode (easily 5 times faster) is there any good reason for that? That seems weird, especially considering that divx or xvid dont have any significant difference in encoding time wether the video is progressive or not.

Without knowing the innerworkings of the codec it is impossible to say for sure. But I suspect it has something to do with the way the codec handles interlacing and poor scaling of the algorythms Microsoft uses. When handling interlaced material it is possible to treat it as half vertical resolution double frame rate. If that is the case and WM scales poorly with verticle resolution it might be a possible explanation. Then again I could be out in left field. I suspect the only person on the forum who could really offer insight is Amir.

Originally posted by billou2k
- Then I had a try with Windows Media encoder to see if it works the same way.. and actually it does. And on top of that I can see ffdshow launched when WM encoder is processing... Is it a normal procedure?

No. This only happens when you have ffdshow set to handle the particular fourcc of the source or raw video in general.

Originally posted by billou2k
Does wm encoder uses direct show to work rather than vfw like vdub.

Yes.

Originally posted by billou2k
it means I could use any pp or noise filtering or anything that ffdshow can do as a preprocessing for the encoding?

Indeed. And it gets better. Recent ffdshow releases come with a general vfw ffmpeg based decoder with all the same features. So it is possible to do the same in Virtualdub alone as well. Or via Avisynth's directshowsource input. :D

Originally posted by billou2k
-And the weirdest thing with wm encoder is that even with a progressive video when I set it to produce a local file with complex decoding etc.. it also produces it way faster than with the vcm codec in progressive mode in vdub...
Does wmencoder only doing real time encoding whatever the settings we use?

I did not quite get that. Your question confused me. Care to rephrase or does anyone else know?

Originally posted by Sagittaire
WM9 solution is very good. it's also for me the most complete soltution of encoding:

You realise that WM9 is no more a complete solution than MPEG4 is. "WM9 is a more complete solution" sounds like more FUD. MPEG4 is every bit as complete a solution as WM9. The only difference is that Microsoft can give away their WM9 products because they have a monopoly to fund it. While MPEG4 companies are left strugling trying to fund their products by sales of their products. There are very complete very good MPEG4 solutions.

I respect everything you say since as you say "for you" they are the best. When it comes down to it we all have our oppinions. And lets all respect that and keep it from escalating into something we don't want. Which I easily think this could become if we are not careful. Since the first post alone we have veered dangerously off topic.

On that topic though I was having some real trouble with an encode I was doing. It was a short music video. Goldfrapp - Twist to be specific. I was encoding for 640x480 @2Mbps from an NTSC capture of a PAL transfer. Needless to say the source is not that clean. There are several fast moving dark segments with brick textured walls etc. So in the output it looked kinda like flowing mud in Xvid. Divx Pro looked worse to me when I tried it. I thought what the hey I'll try WM9 again. WM9 Pro was just awfull. Worse "for me" than even Divx Pro. It took longer and the result was visually worse. Then I thought MPEG quantization matricies in Xvid! Bam instant improvement. The custom quantization matrix feature of Xvid has pulled through for me in some of my most dificult encodes. And that is one of the many reasons why "for me" Xvid is the best choice.

But then again every codec has those odd killer sceens etc.

Originally posted by McoreD
Your above reply to Sagittaire exibits your unawareness of this page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs.aspx in Microsoft Windows Media Site.

Please refrain from baiting people. Lets keep this from becoming a flame fest. And don't call people for hypocracy with hypocracy. Because that would make one a hypocrit. Taking the advertising hype produced by the company or funded by the company that made the product is just naieve. I can post several pages from on2.com and even Divx.com to better your claim. But that would be pointless. Since they all skew towards their products and tend to exagerate.

[dvwannab]

Originally posted by Sagittaire
1. Extracting the AC3 and D2V project using DVD2AVI
2. Converting AC3 to OGG 5.1 using HeadAC3He (1500 Kbps ~LossLess)
3. Creating the *.avs file (which accesses the *.d2v)
4. Using WME9 to encode. video source: *.avs, audio source: Ogg 5.1
5. Using wmstreamedt for Multiaudio Stream WMV9 / WMA9 / WMV
5 bis. Using Graphedit and VirtualDubMod for WMV9 / WMA9 / SRT / MKV

Gladiator sample source is HDTV 1080i ... ;-)

Sagittaire,

Just a quick question for you. How do you capture/transfer your HDTV file to your computer hard-drive? What method do you use?

I ask this because I am not sure how you would capture 1280x720 or higher resolution file and be able to keep that resolution on the transfer to your computer.

I am going to subscribe to HDTV on dishnetwork, so I am looking for the best method to capture - transfer - encode to HD-DVD, HD-DivX, HD-XviD and HD-WMV.

Any help/suggestions you or anyone else can offer would be greatly appreciated.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by dvwannab
Sagittaire,

Just a quick question for you. How do you capture/transfer your HDTV file to your computer hard-drive? What method do you use? As far as I'm aware Sagittaire does not have any genuine Mmpe2 HD source material, such as that currently broadcasted!

I have a few NTSC HD samples but as I live in Europe (the same as Sagittaire) we only have access to one PAL HD satellite channel!

Cheers

[dvwannab]

So I guess his reference to the Gladiator source for his sample may have come from a DVD.

Hmmmm........ the search continues then :mad: grrrrrrhhh

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by dvwannab
So I guess his reference to the Gladiator source for his sample may have come from a DVD.

Hmmmm........ the search continues then :mad: grrrrrrhhh I guess so. He did a similar thing with a Harry Potter trailer!

Upsizing from 720x480/576 DVD sources to 1280x720 or 1920x1080(8) is not really a very good indicator as to how HD would look!

What are you looking for and why?

[jflatt]

dvwannab:
I think you are looking for a mod to your dish receiver that will allow the stream to be copied over the ieee1394 port. They offer things like this at www.169time.com
As far as HD broadcasts, they are around. The best ones I've seen seem to come from HBO using one of the above methods. All the local channels around here always insert their damned station logos.

[Sagittaire]

@ Neo Neko

On that topic though I was having some real trouble with an encode I was doing. It was a short music video. Goldfrapp - Twist to be specific. I was encoding for 640x480 @2Mbps from an NTSC capture of a PAL transfer.

Source ... please ... ;-)

[McoreD]

Originally posted by Neo Neko
WM9 Pro was just awfull. Worse "for me" than even Divx Pro.
The quality of both WMV8 and WMV9 can seriously affect from other installed codec packs and/or some other codecs/demultiplexers (I am still investigating which ones are they).
Once I used to get very bad quality from WMV9, even when I encoded at 3000 Kbps. The quality was similar to an encode of ~150 Kbps. I had no problems with the quality of encoded DivX/XviD at that time.

Finally with regsvr32 I sort of fixed the problem. But still I wasn't satisfied until I gave a clean format and installed only WinDVD, DivX Pro and Windows Media Encoder.

Please refrain from baiting people.
My apologizes for that reply. It won't happen again. :)

I just couldn't resist when he said: With all due respect, straight-off subjective statements like this are an invitation to be ganged up on by the hardcore elite members here. Better duck and hide.

Cheers,
McoreD

[dvwannab]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
I guess so. He did a similar thing with a Harry Potter trailer!

Upsizing from 720x480/576 DVD sources to 1280x720 or 1920x1080(8) is not really a very good indicator as to how HD would look!

What are you looking for and why?

SMD,

I am just looking for the best way to get a HDTV recording from the recorder's hard-drive into my computer's hard-drive. Once on the computer hard-drive, I would then create HD-DVD, HD-DivX and HD-XviD whenever I wanted to.

by jflatt
[B]dvwannab:
I think you are looking for a mod to your dish receiver that will allow the stream to be copied over the ieee1394 port. They offer things like this at www.169time.com
As far as HD broadcasts, they are around. The best ones I've seen seem to come from HBO using one of the above methods. All the local channels around here always insert their damned station logos. [B]

Thanks jflatt. I will take a look-see there.