I'm looking for a better encoder than tmpgenc

[sky_dave]

Tmpgenc is very slow, 10 hours re-encoding m2v
Can you guys recommend me a faster encoder ?

[idbirch2]

Have you tried Cinema Craft Encoder?

If speed is important to you and you don't mind sacrificing a little quality, the latest 1-click DVD backup programs are excellent. DVD2One can downsample an entire movie (nothing stripped) in around 30-45 mins.

[sky_dave]

Thanks for the quick reply, but cce is still slow.
Dvd2one i give it a shot.

[Arky]

Also try DVD Shrink - it's free and it's flippin' excellent! There is a guide for using it on the main site ( http://www.doom9.org/mpg/dvdshrink-main.htm )


Arky ;o)

[fasttimes]

Originally posted by sky_dave
Thanks for the quick reply, but cce is still slow.

How could CCE be too slow?! It's about realtime, on a 2GHz system!

[Arky]

Originally posted by fasttimes
How could CCE be too slow?! It's about realtime, on a 2GHz system!

It's only slow if you compare it to other utilities which selectively remove strategic data from existing MPEG streams, rather than actually truly re-encoding. In this respect, it is unfair to compare CCE (a true encoder/re-encoder) to selective removers of existing data (DVD2One and DVD Shrink being examples of this genre).


Arky ;o)

[sky_dave]

So do you guys think CCE is better than TMPGENC?
If i wanna upgrade my hardware, which one should i do first, the processor, memory, VGA card, or other.

and for dvd2one and dvdshrink, i'm not gonna use them cause i'm looking for one-stop encoder.

Is a hardware encoder will do better job?

[Arky]

Originally posted by sky_dave
So do you guys think CCE is better than TMPGENC?
If i wanna upgrade my hardware, which one should i do first, the processor, memory, VGA card, or other.

and for dvd2one and dvdshrink, i'm not gonna use them cause i'm looking for one-stop encoder.

Is a hardware encoder will do better job?

CCE is not "Better" than TMPGEnc in all respects. It is mainly considered superior on two counts:

1) Awesome control over Variable BitRate encoding (multiple passes, and integrated analysis tools for tweaking subsequent passes even further). #NOTE! - Cinemacraft Basic will only do max of 2 pass VBR (although this is still very respectable), and does not include integrated MPEG stream analysis#. If you need more than 2passes, and you need integrated stream analysis, you need SP, but that costs about $1,900 more than Basic.

2) S-P-E-E-E-E-D-!-! (refers to both versions of Cinemacraft, thankfully).

IF, however, you are creating non-standard frame sizes, or are working with source materials of various sizes, then TMPGEnc is much better for the job because it quite simply doesn't bat an eyelid, regardless of what source framesize you feed it, or what output framesize you desire - it's resizing capabilities are, frankly, second to none (I'm talking about comparisons of integrated resizing here), and it is superbly flexible. Having said that, Canopus ProCoder is pretty damn good in this respect too, but that's another can of worms!

In short, it's very much a case of Horse For Courses. If you use only DVD-standard frame sizes, both in terms of Source and Output, then Cinemacraft may well be the best option for you. If you mix and match a hell of a lot, then Cinemacraft would be less appropriate than TMPGEnc.

Both encoders produce superb quality, with any differences being somewhat subjective. At the end of the day, they BOTH create MPEG streams of a quality which would be useable in virtually all circumstances, easily rivalling many (but not the stratospherically-priced ones) hardware encoders costing thousands of dollars. I've seen some Hollywood DVDs with MPEG encoding that TMPGEnc or Cinemacraft could put to shame! Honestly. The only real criticism one might level at TMPGEnc (speed aside) is that very occasionally, it doesn't do such a good job of calculating motion vectors etc., which means that with extremely fast-moving action footage, sometimes the image quality does degrade, with macroblock distortions always threatening to rear their ugly heads. Cinemacraft is better in such cases, but I must stress that it does take a lot to upset TMPGEnc, and you might never come across this issue, particularly if you are encoding at higher bitrates.

ProCoder is somewhat of a compromise between the strong points of Cinemacraft and TMPGEnc, but it ain't cheap, when you compare it to Cinemacraft Basic and TMPGEnc. Also bear in mind that some encoders perform better with noisier material (such as DVcam/miniDV footage) than others do. ProCoder is particularly good with noisy material.

*********************************************************************

So, in choosing an encoder, you should think very carefully about:

What your source material will be (DVD rips, DVcam/miniDV, miscellaneous...)

Will you be resizing/upscaling/downscaling source footage in relation to desired output framesize?

Whether you need to concatenate various source files into one MPEG stream

Whether you will need to clean up noisy footage, or if your source footage will generally be of a 'clean' nature.

How quickly you need to encode (are you, for example, encoding MPEG in order to author DVDs to a tight (commercial?) deadline, or are you happy to leave stuff to encode overnight, at your leisure?) - in short, do you want speed for luxury, or do you need speed for profit?

Will you be squeezing the absolute most you can onto a DVD-R, or will you be producing short-duration (i.e. 90mins or less) projects, or have the luxury of being able to author for DVD9 (dual layer). These factors have a bearing on how much bitrate you can get away with using - if you have long duration, and are trying to cram it onto a small capacity disk (which would be a DVD5 or a DVD-R), then you will need to have fairly tight control over VBR parameters, to get the most efficient usage of your finite available bitrate.


*********************************************************************

With regard to hardware upgrades, you should upgrade your processor and your memory at the same time because the Processor makes the single biggest difference to encoding performance (but will 'choke' a little without enough RAM to 'breathe'), and because Cinemacraft requires a bare minimum of 256mb RAM (really 512mb is appropriate, or even more if you can stretch to it, but 512mb is just great). RAM is so absurdly cheap at the moment that you really shouldn't think twice - just go out and spend a few $£'s on the stuff N-O-W-!!


Arky ;o)

[auenf]

or refer to this test http://www.tecoltd.com/enctest/enctest.htm where they ran thru lots of different encoders (hardware and software).

couple of notes tho, ProCoder isnt tested, and the nice piece of hardware i use at work (Canopus Amber) has this in the comments;

What we realized at higher bitrates using normal source files Amber creates really excellent quality. As long as we agree that nowadays the average bitrate of a DVD-VIDEO is around 6-6.5 Mbit/sec, then with this conditions this encoder could be the best solution. Really better than Cinemacraft or Tsunami. This is why we suggest it.

Enf...

[fasttimes]

Originally posted by auenf
or refer to this test http://www.tecoltd.com/enctest/enctest.htm where they ran thru lots of different encoders (hardware and software).

Too out of date, IMO. They need to do some retesting with the latest versions of all encoders.

[auenf]

Originally posted by fasttimes
Too out of date, IMO. They need to do some retesting with the latest versions of all encoders.

the encoding quality doesnt vary greatly from version to version, but im sure (as with tmpg), if a significantly better version comes out, they would add it. (maybe with a little prompting tho)

Enf...