CCE Vs Procoder [Archive]

dssgorila

20th July 2005, 01:49

Can anyone answer the following:
1.Can batchCCE use procoder?
2.What are the differences between speed/quality?

dssgorila

20th July 2005, 05:12

Alright so i see that procoder can be used with batchcce but i dont think it works with the big 3. I tried change the encoder in the template and running batchcce and got a number of errors :(

Can anyone confirm this?

Matthew

20th July 2005, 08:08

Unless it's changed, ProCoder does not support specification of i-frames, which means chapters won't be where they should.

Anyway, my own very limited experience with ProCoder was that it was great with a noisy DVD source I had, but it was quite clear that it had applied anti-noise without me selecting any such setting. I've read about others having similar experiences.

Zyphon

20th July 2005, 09:16

The thing I don't like with ProCoder as it doesn't (to my knowledge) support custom matrices whereas CCE does. That is why I prefer CCE oh and the i-frames issue. :)

Trahald

20th July 2005, 17:56

The newest unstable batchcce's can use procoder.(through ecl pro) The pgc is encoded in different segments so that i frames are in the right places and then joined at the end (and pulldown is applied if needed).

HCENC, QUENC , (eclpro)PROcoder are now supported in addition to cce sp and cce basic.. i really havent rung the new encoder throught the ringer as far as testing with batchcce (well i use hcenc alot) so use with caution.

FreaQ

21st July 2005, 20:16

I had some "problems" with ProCoder a few days ago.
I did a movie with some extras. Movie 6500 kb/s avg, extras 4000kb/s avg.
With ProCoder 2 result was only 50-60% of the size I reached with CCE 2.70. So I wasted about 1,5GB of usable size on a DVDR.
I don't know how this happend. Same settings just another encoder. Both used with BatchCCE 0.9.1.6f