|
Problems w/MPEG2 encoding. Bad interlacing artifacts...
|
|
|
nitelife
Newbie
|
14. February 2003 @ 16:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hello,
I have an AVI source file from my Sony Digital 8 Cam (which looks great) that I'm trying to eventually burn to DVD. I've used all types of different encoders (including TMPGEnc.exe) and they all end up with bad interlacing lines in the video, ESPECIALLY when something moves fast on screen. These are not in my source file, so there must be a setting I have wrong w/the encoders. any suggestions?
Thanks ;) Gordon
|
|
Advertisement
|
  |
|
|
|
Bernie
Newbie
|
17. March 2003 @ 17:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
I apologize in advance for the length of this note, but wanted to let you know I am totally with you on this one Gordon! A friend and I are experiencing the EXACT same problems; and we DID try just about every permutation possible on the settings on MANY different software encoders to no avail. I predict this problem is not solved by simple adjustments to bitrate, quality, interlacing, etc. We are finding more and more people who are bumping into this apparent "week-link-in-the-chain" of the camera-to-DVD process.
Trying to speak with various companies' tech support staff has been PAINFUL! Without exception, either they don't have the experience to know, deny ever having heard of such a problem stemming from their "superior quality software", or they claim that the problem is common but that it goes away completely when you go ahead and burn to DVD and play back on an NTSC TV from a component player. (Trust me, after burning stacks of tests, the problem does not go away by this method. It's not as pronounced on an NTSC TV but the degradtion from the quality of the DV/AVI source is still EXTREMELY pronounced.)
Today, though, I did get something new. I finally got through to Canopus technical support. The tech said he knew exactly what I was talking about, had experienced this problem himself, and had passed it back to his engineers. I wouldn't consider this progress, but it sure feels good when others closer to product development acknowledge problems exist. The tech said he was committed to solving the problem, too, and we will be continuing to swap emails. Hope?
The one who solves this important problem will be my hero as passing along the solution to the problem will require knowledge, action, and honestly about product capabilities (or lack thereof).
Let's keep in touch. Bernie :)
|
|
itguru
Newbie
|
4. January 2004 @ 12:22 |
Link to this message
|
I dont mean to sound like a smartoff, but have you deinterlaced the video? There is a checkbox in TMPGEnc to do that. The interlace lines are very bad if your camera is shakey (like mine). I am using a sony mini dv and firewire and I am having the same problem. So far the solution has been to hold the camera as steady as possible, and to encode it using tmpgenc(with deinterlace), and burn it to dvd with roxio dvd builder. The quality is really good so far.
Luck,
------------------------------
Intel P4 2.4 800FSB (HT)
ABIT IC6 Mobo (Loveit)
1024 MB Dual Channel DDR400
Dual 120GB SATA 150 (Raid-0)
Radeon 9000 AGP 8x
5 Dollar Sound Card
------------------------------
|
|
Minion
AfterDawn Addict
|
4. January 2004 @ 16:13 |
Link to this message
|
These interlace artifacts will only be Present on your Monitor because PC Monitors are not meant to Display interlaced Material were your TV is...So once burned to CD/DVD and Played on your TV there will Not be any interlace artifacts unless you have the Field Order Reverced, To make sure that doesn"t Happen you should Load your Source File into TMPGEnc useing the "Wizard" and then TMPGEnc will analize your Source File to see if it is interlaced or Progressive and if it is interlaced it will analize it for the correct Field Order and then set the Files order setting to the Correct setting ,When Loading your Source Files into TMPGEnc without the Wizard then it does not do this so your Field operation Settings could be incorrect in which case you could be encodeing Progressive material as interlaced or Visa versa and have the Field order Incorrectly set...But if you really want to deinterlace(After you have determined that the source really is interlaced with the Wizard) TMPGEnc has 16 Different Deinterlace Filters to Choose From, you Just go into the Advanced setting and double Click the "Deinterlace Filter" and a window will Pop up with your File displayed in the window and the different filters underneath in the dropdown menu..Usually Even Field or Odd Field will look Best....Cheers
P-4 2.6ghz (Overclocked to 3.2ghz)
Abit IS7
1gb Dual Chanell DDR 400mhz
Zalman CNPS7000-CU Cooler(Modded with 50cfm Fan)
XFX Gforce 6600GT 128mb GDDR3 (500/1000)
Pinnacle DV500 ADVC Editing Card
RaidMax Scorpio ATX Case + 5 Led
|
|
BJKESLER
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
14. January 2004 @ 14:03 |
Link to this message
|
I agree. I have been burning SVCD for 2 years now and the quality is terrible. So I wait for the DVD burners to come down in price. I bought a HP 300 about week ago. I am not impressed. The software stinks. It will not capture properly so I used other proven software methods. The quality is better than SVCD but nowhere near the Sony digital 8 tape. I am really disappointed.
I thinking the compression technology is not there yet for the home user. I now it exists with the high end studio equipment. VHS is still a better option as far as quality video. Which is a darn shame.
|
|
Minion
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. January 2004 @ 16:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
It seems you aren"t doing something Properly...I have made Lots of SVCD"s that were close to DVD Quality and Lots of DVD"s that are Retail DVD Quality..It all depends on your Video Source and the Software you use and if you are doing Video capture it is good to the best Capture device you can..You can"t capture VHS tapes and expect DVD Quality But you can capture Digital cable or Satalite and get Better than VHS quality if you have the right capture device and software...
P-4 2.6ghz (Overclocked to 3.2ghz)
Abit IS7
1gb Dual Chanell DDR 400mhz
Zalman CNPS7000-CU Cooler(Modded with 50cfm Fan)
XFX Gforce 6600GT 128mb GDDR3 (500/1000)
Pinnacle DV500 ADVC Editing Card
RaidMax Scorpio ATX Case + 5 Led
|
|
BJKESLER
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
14. January 2004 @ 17:55 |
Link to this message
|
My camera is a Sony Digital 8 camera using firewire. I can bring video in on firewire and edit and send it back to tape with no problems. Video capturing is not a problem, it is encoding it for CD or DVD.
Playing the camera thru the TV is excellent. I can copy the Digital 8 tape directly to VHS and it is very good. Better than any VCD or DVD so far
The problem is converting the DV-AVI to MPEG2. I tried several programs. Video Factory, Pinnacle, AIST, ArcSoft, Nero, Tmpgen, etc.
I'm open to suggestions.
|
|
Minion
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. January 2004 @ 18:38 |
Link to this message
|
Well all of the Encodeing Programs you mentioned are Total Crap accept maybe TMPGEnc which can be a Little Buggy and will Only Accept Type-2 DV files...A Good encoder is Something like CinemaCraft encoder 2.67 when used in Conjunction with AVISynth ,Or even Mainconcept encoder is a Good one and Canopus Procoder is another good one..CinemaCraft sells for about $2000 and Canopus Procoder sells for about $700 so these are Pretty high end encoders so you expect superior Quality with them But even TMPGEnc when used Properly should Produce a Mpeg file with Very Little Differance from the original when going from AVI to Mpeg2 for DVD.....
P-4 2.6ghz (Overclocked to 3.2ghz)
Abit IS7
1gb Dual Chanell DDR 400mhz
Zalman CNPS7000-CU Cooler(Modded with 50cfm Fan)
XFX Gforce 6600GT 128mb GDDR3 (500/1000)
Pinnacle DV500 ADVC Editing Card
RaidMax Scorpio ATX Case + 5 Led
|
|
Bernie
Newbie
|
30. January 2004 @ 01:17 |
Link to this message
|
No offense to you, Minion and itguru, but it sounds like your definition of ?good quality? video must be different than mine, BJKesler, nitelife, and so many others outside this thread that are not achieving good results in DVI to MPEG2 conversion. I?ve made a hobby of collecting messages from many sources about MPEG2 encoding problems. The vast majority of these messages describe the same basic problem: a MAJOR difference from original when going from DV/AVI from consumer grade cameras to MPEG2. I hope there is a solution for the home user, but I can assure you it is not a simple matter of changing interlacing settings, viewing results on different monitors, or using TMPGEnc or some higher end software converter. It?s been tried.
In addition to what has been written above, here is how others have described the problem. The corruption that occurs in going from DV/AVI to MPEG?called artifacts, edge aliasing, scanline double vision, shadow effect, edge streaking, etc.?is a degradation that often looks like every other scanline on a moving object is offset by a little from the alternate set of every other scanline. It is most noticeable on moving edges. Pausing the encoded MPEG2 converted video during scenes of high motion yields perhaps the best look at the problems (i.e., the stills can look very streaked at edges, rather than clear or smoothly blurred as they do with commercial MPEG2, DV source tape, DV/AVI or other high quality source video). DV/AVI can be imported from tape and exported back out to tape just fine w/very high quality?no degradation.
I could go into a lot more detail. Write me if you are interested. But for me, the burning questions still remain:
Is this just simply the level of quality we must expect/accept given the state of home technology? If so, when can we finally look forward to everyone admitting the shortfall? If not, then why hasn?t this problem been admitted and addressed? I can assure you there is a BIG market for this solution. I have a database of those in need.
I would enjoy your comments.
|
|
BJKESLER
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
30. January 2004 @ 17:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
AMEN Bernie.
|
|
BJKESLER
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
31. January 2004 @ 06:51 |
Link to this message
|
Does anyone have experience with the new Sony DVD HandyCam? I am curious if the quality is as good as the Digtal 8 tape. Are they using MPEP2 hardware compression?
Using Moviemaker 2, I converted DV-AVI to the new highmat WMV format. It reduces the artifacts tremendously but the subject is blurred during any noticeable motion. It is better than anything I've tried off the shelf for ease of use. It will burn HighMAt on CDs or DVDs. It actually gives the digital date/time stamp information on the frame sets where other packages I've tried do not. This is convenient since the information is not embedded when burning to CD or DVD.
|
|
Minion
AfterDawn Addict
|
31. January 2004 @ 12:14 |
Link to this message
|
Well I have never Tried a sony DVD Camcorder but if it Records to DVD then it would use a Mpeg 1 or 2 format which is the Only format that can be used to make a DVD, So encodeing your Files to such a Low Quality format as WMV is Not a good Idea..I"m surprised Poeple even use Windows Movie Maker because it is Mostly a Microsoft propaganda Machine used for Promoteing the Crappy WMV Format or the Microsoft DV codec...The WMV Format is used For Streaming Video Mostly which uses a Lower bandwidth than other Non streaming Formats which Produces Lower Quality Video than Formats that are Not Made for streaming..If your Intention is to Make a VCD or DVD that will be Playable on any DVD Player then you should be rendering your projects in Windows Movie Maker as DV AVI files then useing a High Quality Mpeg encoder to encode these Files to Mpeg1 or 2 for (S)VCD or DVD ,and then you would author these Mpeg1/2 files to CD/DVD useing a Authoring program...Cheers
P-4 2.6ghz (Overclocked to 3.2ghz)
Abit IS7
1gb Dual Chanell DDR 400mhz
Zalman CNPS7000-CU Cooler(Modded with 50cfm Fan)
XFX Gforce 6600GT 128mb GDDR3 (500/1000)
Pinnacle DV500 ADVC Editing Card
RaidMax Scorpio ATX Case + 5 Led
|
|
BJKESLER
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
31. January 2004 @ 14:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
You might want to bone up WMV, not just for streaming.
High Definition TV.
|
|
Minion
AfterDawn Addict
|
31. January 2004 @ 14:31 |
Link to this message
|
But why would you want to Encode to it??? You cant Make a Proper DVD with it, you can"t Make anything that will Play on a DVD Player, and encodeing to this Format and then Re-encodeing it to Mpeg2 for DVD will Just degrade the Quality...I have Tried the High Resolution profiles with WMV9 and wasn"t Impressed and could not see the Use For them Accept for Streaming, What are you going to Play it on Becides your PC?? WMV is not a Format that is used in HDTV as HDTV is usually Transmited in a Mpeg2 TS stream....
P-4 2.6ghz (Overclocked to 3.2ghz)
Abit IS7
1gb Dual Chanell DDR 400mhz
Zalman CNPS7000-CU Cooler(Modded with 50cfm Fan)
XFX Gforce 6600GT 128mb GDDR3 (500/1000)
Pinnacle DV500 ADVC Editing Card
RaidMax Scorpio ATX Case + 5 Led
|
|
BJKESLER
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
31. January 2004 @ 18:07 |
Link to this message
|
You must have an old DVD player. It plays fine on mine. Most all new DVD players will play WMV format.
No need to re-encode to MPEG2. It has less artifacts than VCD and DVDs using TMPGEnc. If TMPGEnc is so great why does it require so much tweaking. I'd like to know you magic settings. I'm not pro-Microsoft but recognize when a free product is better than the ones you pay for.
|
|
Minion
AfterDawn Addict
|
31. January 2004 @ 20:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
The Highmat Format on DVD players Is Quite New ..Panasinic Only Has 6 Players available with highmat support, and the First was Only released in Northamerica 7 months ago so Most New DVD Players do Not support Highmat..Toshiba did not have a single Model in 2003 that supported Highmat, and from what I know there are very few programs that can be used to Author Highmat DVD"s ,Moviemaker 2.0 and Media Player 9 has a Little Utility for authoring Mighmat..I don"t think It is going to Catch on even though the Concept is sound because of the release of Blue Lazer/Blue ray soon File size won"t be much of a concern then again Highmat will Probably be supported on Blue ray....
P-4 2.6ghz (Overclocked to 3.2ghz)
Abit IS7
1gb Dual Chanell DDR 400mhz
Zalman CNPS7000-CU Cooler(Modded with 50cfm Fan)
XFX Gforce 6600GT 128mb GDDR3 (500/1000)
Pinnacle DV500 ADVC Editing Card
RaidMax Scorpio ATX Case + 5 Led
|
|
Gusto
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. February 2004 @ 19:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm reading this with high interest as I've been attempting to solve similar problems for over a month... and I'm a broadcast tech!
My question: Has anyone tried recording from consumer analogue tapes to a dedicated standalone DVD recorder? Is the problem any better?
|
|
trx
Newbie
|
2. February 2004 @ 04:42 |
Link to this message
|
I've run into the same interlacing problems with DV AVI's. I'm no expert (more of a beginner) but there are interlacing artifacts because the source (DV tape) is interlaced but AVI is Progressive (non-interlaced). Two interlaced fields are combined to form one complete AVI frame and you see the problems when there is motion because the two DV fields are taken at different times. My solution has been to use AviSynth or VirtualDub and applying a deinterlacing filter before encoding to MPEG 2. These filters seem to do a pretty good job at 'correcting' the video. There multiple filters out there so you'd have to test them to see which works best for you. Hopefully I didn't repeat to much of what's already been said.
|
|
Minion
AfterDawn Addict
|
2. February 2004 @ 11:33 |
Link to this message
|
The interlace artifacts you are seeing will Not be Visible on your TV Set...PC Monitors are Made to Display Progressive Video so interlaced vidio will allways Playback with interlace artifacts on a Monitor unless your software Movie Player has a Built in Deinterlace filter...AVI Can be Progressive or interlaced depending on what the Source is and what codec and Filters are used to Create the AVI..Deinterlaceing is Generally a Bad Idea because most Deinterlacers Just drop one of the Fields and display the other so you are Looseing 50% of the Video Information when Deinterlaceing and it can make your Image Blurry ,But if you have to deinterlace I find the Best filter is AVISynth"s "Smart Bob" filter....Cheers
P-4 2.6ghz (Overclocked to 3.2ghz)
Abit IS7
1gb Dual Chanell DDR 400mhz
Zalman CNPS7000-CU Cooler(Modded with 50cfm Fan)
XFX Gforce 6600GT 128mb GDDR3 (500/1000)
Pinnacle DV500 ADVC Editing Card
RaidMax Scorpio ATX Case + 5 Led
|
|
Bernie
Newbie
|
3. February 2004 @ 13:29 |
Link to this message
|
Minion and trx, you make some valid and interesting points. And perhaps you are even making some headway toward a solution to the degradation problem that so many are experiencing. But I would like to provide some additional food for thought that might add some clarity to the problem.
First, you brought up a potential cause of the video degradation problem: DV tape interlaced vs. DV/AVI Progressive field compatibility. I have heard this theory before. But I am still not convinced it is the cause. Why? The video degradation does not seem to take place in the DV tape-to-DV/AVI transition (back and forth). So I ask myself. ?how could this DV tape - DV/AVI compatibility issue be impacting the loss that occurs in the transfer from DV/AVI to MPEG2?? Maybe there is a connection but I sure do not see it right now.
Second, the quality loss that we are trying to address is so major and so visible that it really doesn?t matter whether you can see the fine details of the ?scanline shift? problem or not. It doesn?t matter whether you are viewing it on a TV screen or a computer monitor. Even with high end home converters, the quality of the MPEG2 video is soooo much worse than the original DV tape or DV/AVI no matter what screen you use.
Minion, like you, I do not believe in solutions that throw significant amounts of information away. So if that is indeed what de-interlacing does, I simply can?t see how this helps anyone. For a similar reason, I also do not believe in blurring technology. Blurring does not solve the degradation, it simply makes it easier on the eyes by making everything less sharp. There has got to be a better way.
|
|
Minion
AfterDawn Addict
|
3. February 2004 @ 14:27 |
Link to this message
|
What are you useing to encode your DV AVI files to Mpeg2?? The encoder has a very Big impact on the Quality after encodeing to Mpeg2...There are only 4 encoders that I believe are even worth useing, They are TMPGEnc ,Mainconcept Encoder ,Canopus Procoder and CinemaCraft encoder ,Most all others are pretty much Crap, and the settings used in the encoder are very important also and useing a High enough bitrate to Achieve the Quality you want, and Progressive and interlaced Video needs different Scanning Patterns when encodeing to Mpeg2 and selecting the wrong one can really degrade the Quality...I use DV Source Files Occationally and Never had a problem with Quality after encodeing so I wonder whay you are haveing Problems...well i hope you get it worked out...Cheers
P-4 2.6ghz (Overclocked to 3.2ghz)
Abit IS7
1gb Dual Chanell DDR 400mhz
Zalman CNPS7000-CU Cooler(Modded with 50cfm Fan)
XFX Gforce 6600GT 128mb GDDR3 (500/1000)
Pinnacle DV500 ADVC Editing Card
RaidMax Scorpio ATX Case + 5 Led
|
|
BJKESLER
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
4. February 2004 @ 15:39 |
Link to this message
|
The only encoder that is affordable is TMPGEnc and its not perfect regardless of the claims of some. TMPGEnc can be tweaked but the standard settings are as crappy as the others if not worse. Nero probably has the best out the box no tweaking required encoder producing the best result. None of the affordable ones have reach Digital 8 tape quality yet.
|
|
Minion
AfterDawn Addict
|
4. February 2004 @ 22:14 |
Link to this message
|
I would not say that at all..Nero is well Known in the Video Comunity as haveing probably the Absolute Worst Quality encoder ever created, It is definately a Newbie encoder but even a Newbie should notice the Absolutly awefull Quality of the Mpeg encodeing done By Nero...If you use the Standard Templates in TMPGEnc but set the "Motion Search Precition" to "High Quality" then you will get very Good results ,TMPGEnc is Probably the Highest Quality Mpeg1 encoder out there But it"s Mpeg2 encodeing is Only Above average..For High Quality Mpeg2 the Best and Fastest Is Probably CCE SP 2.67 but it is also the Most Complex to use but if you Know anything about what settings do what in an encoder then it should be simple to set up no mater the encoder...Cheers
P-4 2.6ghz (Overclocked to 3.2ghz)
Abit IS7
1gb Dual Chanell DDR 400mhz
Zalman CNPS7000-CU Cooler(Modded with 50cfm Fan)
XFX Gforce 6600GT 128mb GDDR3 (500/1000)
Pinnacle DV500 ADVC Editing Card
RaidMax Scorpio ATX Case + 5 Led
|
|
trx
Newbie
|
6. February 2004 @ 05:05 |
Link to this message
|
Minion, what capture program do you use to create interlaced AVI's? I've tried Roxio DVD builder (junk), DVIO and WinDV and they all seem to produce Progressive AVI's. Also, depending on what TV you have these interlaced artifacts can be very noticeable. I have a 56" DLP TV in which everything is displayed in 720p so it's closer to a computer monitor than an old NTSC SDTV. Any loss in quality is noticeable on this TV. I quickly learned how bad Roxio DVD builder was at MPEG-2 compression.
Want to see sample DV frame with interlaced artifacts and the same frame using a deinterlacing filter? Here it is: http://trx.punknet.org/gallery/album02 The first two images shows before & after shots of deinterlacing. The deinterlacer I used does not drop resolution and minimizes blur as much as it can.
Bernie, do you have any before and after shots showing the quality you are loosing? I haven't done much encoding but I don't see much loss in quality. Yes, there will be a little since you are re-compressing video from one format to the other and at a considerably lower bit rate but it shouldn't be that noticeable. I also have uploaded 3 shots of video frame showing the original, one compressed with CCE and one compressed with Roxio DVD builder. I can't remember the CCE settings but I'm sure they weren't optimal since I was still learning at the time I did it. As you can see Roxio looks like crap.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Minion
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. February 2004 @ 12:25 |
Link to this message
|
Most All DV Is interlaced Bottom Field First unless you have a 24p(FPS) Film DV Camera But those are Extremely expensive, accept From What I hear that the Microsoft DV codec does Deinterlaceing with DX9 ...Much of the Time it is Hard to tell if a frame is interlaced or Not unless there is Moovement but one way to tell for sure is to use a Tool To analize the Frame for it"s Picture Structure...There is one such tool in AVISynth but it is easier to just Load the DV AVI file into TMPGEnc useing the WiZard which will automaticly Analize the Files for it"s Frame Structure and if it is interlaced it will then analize the Frames for the Correct Field order which in Most all cases will be Bottom field First...There are all Different Kinds of deinterlace Filters, Some of them Remove One Field some of them Blend Both Fields together and some Only Blend were there is Moovement, and Not all Deinterlace Filters make your File Progressive either..In most Cases you should only really see interlace artifacts on your TV when the Field order is set incorrectly as 30fps 60fields/ps DV and Broadcast TV signals are displayed in the Same way so in theory if you get interlace artifacts on your TV set when displaying interlaced DV Material then you should also get Artifacts when Watching Broadcast TV...Most any Capture program will Capture interlaced AVI as Long as the vertical resolution is above 240/288-PAL, Like Virtual-Dub ,Virtual VCR or any other VFW or Direct Show capture program....
P-4 2.6ghz (Overclocked to 3.2ghz)
Abit IS7
1gb Dual Chanell DDR 400mhz
Zalman CNPS7000-CU Cooler(Modded with 50cfm Fan)
XFX Gforce 6600GT 128mb GDDR3 (500/1000)
Pinnacle DV500 ADVC Editing Card
RaidMax Scorpio ATX Case + 5 Led
|
