Most popular AutoGK settings

[cyberVera]

It would be interesting to know, what AutoGK setting are most popular?

Mine are:

Size: 699Mb
Resolution: Minimum 512
Audio: VBR 128
Subtitles: No
Codec: DivX (5.0.5)

[namchik]

In the FAQ its written:
4.3 Which codecs are supported?
- At the moment the only two supported codecs are: XviD 1.0.x and DivX 5.2.1 Pro
5.0.5 is still supported :confused:

[chilled]

unsupported doesnt mean other versions do not work, but just that bug repports etc wont be answered if other versions used. so 5.21 pro is recomended.

mine (for 1cd rips) are the same but audio is always set at 112 (even 96) and I definately use XviD with HIGHLY recomended credits compression option.

[jtan2000]

.....

[boombastic]

I don't understand a thing:AutoGk make a compressibility test and,more generally speaking,analyze the source,than look at the size you want and choose all the parameters for the encoding,so if it chooses a resolution lower than 512 there will be a motivation,so why limitate it setting a minimum resolution?
Maybe i'm wrong...

[woah!]

Size: 1/3 DVDR 1493MB
Resolution: Auto (normally ends up at 720 with these settings)
Audio: AC3 / 6ch or 2ch depending on movie length
Subtitles: Forced Subs only
Codec: XviD (DXN Profile used)
Credits: Q 30%
Xvid Forced Sharp Matrix

[niamh]

I don't understand a thing:AutoGk make a compressibility test and,more generally speaking,analyze the source,than look at the size you want and choose all the parameters for the encoding,so if it chooses a resolution lower than 512 there will be a motivation,so why limitate it setting a minimum resolution?

My guess is some people complained to have the right to mess things up as they wished ;). Only a guess though. As well as AutoGk does get it wrong sometimes, meaning in a few cases, an increased resolution might look better, notwithstanding the comp test results. On the whole though, I would entirely agree that the whole point of using AutoGK is because it knows better than you :)

[xtc]

Size: 2CD if length > 110 min, depends on FPS

Subs: Usually English (External, vobsub)

Audio:
1CD = MP3 128 VBR
2CD = AC3/DTS

Codec: XviD, always.

Resolution: (Depends on AR)
2.35:1 - Width = 640
1.85:1 - Width = 592
1.78:1 - Width = 624
1.33:1 - Width = 576

I haven't tried auto-settings, and I don't expect I ever will :)

[LordBug]

My settings:

XviD for all

Movies - 700meg
Episodes/short movies - 5meg per minute of video.

Other settings at default.

[fewtch]

Originally posted by niamh
My guess is some people complained to have the right to mess things up as they wished ;). Only a guess though. As well as AutoGk does get it wrong sometimes, meaning in a few cases, an increased resolution might look better, notwithstanding the comp test results.
There's no real way AutoGK could know if one resolution "looks better" than another... too many variables involved in playback. The one coming immediately to mind is that I like to watch my movies full-screen (1024x768x32bits) no matter what the resolution of the AVI, so it might be better to encode with a larger size to start with. So IMHO there's nothing at all wrong with setting minimum, maximum or whatever (and it seems Len0x agrees, since this is not in the hidden settings, but advanced ones).

[Rafael]

Maybe someone here can give me some pointers. Ever since I upgraded to the new stable version plus 2.01 Beta, some of my XviD's have started to come out jerky. Any clues? Thanks in advance.

[Hobojobo]

"quality over size and 1 pass is faster, isn't it"

I use

XviD
Target quality 70-75 %
Fixed width: 704
output audio type: auto (ac3 for my dub, mp3 vbr for original)

quality over size and 1 pass is faster than 2, isn't it

DVB recordings are a bit more tricky (interlaced, noise)
To avoid that the encoded file is bigger than the original I often lower the resolution and/or quality.

Just my 2 cents.

[kilivipin]

Film's I am not crazy about: 1 cd, 128kbs mp3(CBR), Auto Width
Films over 1:30: 2 cds, Auto Width, 160kps mp3.
Really Noisy sources, eg: Lars Von Trier stuff: A whole lot of bits.

[ukb008]

Hi,

1.

Reading the posts one thing became somewhat certain: users mostly opt for custom width rather than let AGK decide it.

I don't know why.

I thought AGK decides best resolution based on it's internal processes which include CompTest, output file size, audio type and bitrate etc. I think the developer believes these calculations to yield a quality that is objective, demonstrable and repeatable.

Of course, AGK's decisions can be set aside by the user, but there is no reason to believe that those actions would produce better video.

Again, the term 'better' is subjective. AGK bases output on objective calculations.

Having said all that, I find it slightly spooky that AGK has been known to output files with different characteristics (e.g. AR, Average Bitrate etc) on processing the same set of VOBs at different times with the same settings.

2.

Another thing has become clear. Use of XCD modality is not common at all. I opt for a custom size of 790 MB for 1-CD FinalFile, which I then make into a m2f2 CD image with m2cdmaker, and burn with Nero on Imation 52x CD-Rs. 790 MB gives me an amazing picture quality.

Regards.

[Aegis]

Everything: 128Kbps CBR
>60 minutes: 1 CD (movies)
60-40: 1/2 CD (hour-long tv episodes)
<40: 1/4 CD (1/2 hour tv episodes)

AutoGK calls the shots on all other settings.

The slightly higher compression is to accommodate high volume. I'm getting a Seagate 400GB Baracuda (http://www.seagate.com/cda/products/discsales/marketing/detail/0,1081,630,00.html) hdd & remote control setup, an Antec Overture (http://www.antec.com/us/productDetails.php?ProdID=15728) pc case, and putting the 500 or so dvds at my disposal on it. It'll be a fantastic movie jukebox. Browsing a file list is much easier than browsing physical media. Couple this with a wireless card to add movies & act as the "movie server"...The great thing about high compression is that you can watch a decent-looking movie without worrying about bandwidth.

[len0x]

Originally posted by ukb008
Reading the posts one thing became somewhat certain: users mostly opt for custom width rather than let AGK decide it.


Most of AutoGK users are not posting here. Posters in this forum are somewhat more advanced and its only natural that they like tweaking things. Nothing unusual about it.

[ukb008]

Boy, talk about tweaking AGK. Philosophically, this tool is designed mainly for people who know very little (or nothing) about video conversion and want to create videos for their standalones or PC in a few clicks of a mouse.

Logically, therefore, tweakability should be minimal, and probably rightly so. Tweaks include possibilities to interfere with the legally programmed opearation path, and we can see your conscious effort to shield the user from that - putting a lot of 'tweak's in the hidden option tool, effectively making them parts of the program as choices, so that they can no longer be called 'tweak's.

'Tweak's, I think by the nature of them, are modifying a program operation without the knowledge of the developer, but not necessarily earning the developer's dispproval. There is progressively less and less opportunity of tweaking in AGK in the real sense. Any opportunities (holes) discovered and used to tweak will likely end up in the hidden options as official choices sooner or later.

But that, again, is the philosophy of AGK.

Regards.

[dlight]

I find that my settings never stick and I can't tell if a particular encode used them. Every time I go into the settings they are all back to defaults. What am I missing? I read AutoGK uses best settings in the FAQ, what does that mean?

[unskinnyboy]

Originally posted by dlight
I find that my settings never stick and I can't tell if a particular encode used them. Every time I go into the settings they are all back to defaults. What am I missing? I read AutoGK uses best settings in the FAQ, what does that mean?
Which version of AutoGK are you using? The newest, 2.07b retains most of the needed settings. Whenever you install a new version, it will delete all the previous saved settings though (since 1.90b).

[cyberVera]

Originally posted by len0x
Most of AutoGK users are not posting here. Posters in this forum are somewhat more advanced and its only natural that they like tweaking things. Nothing unusual about it.

True.

The question is why they do that. It is not that they do not "trust" AutoGK and your undoubtfull knowledge. Just there is still one big drawback of the program and the idea behind it - it studies only a source and does not take into account computer's playback power (hardware + software) and exchange compatibility.
But also I think nothing can be done here - a wizard with such questions will make it ManualGK, not AutoGK :-)

Frankly speaking, I use AutoGK not because it is automatic (I still do not understand the absence of credits setting for DivX among hidden settings), but because I'm amused how smart it is while analysing a source and deinterlacing and hybrids and all that stuff.

[ukb008]

Here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&postid=567109#post567302) is a post by len0x dated 8th November 2004: it predicted a dark future for AGK and a darker one for GK.

We are happy that GK and AGK are both bright and going strong.

Regards.