User User name Password  
   
Sunday 27.7.2025 / 05:02
Search AfterDawn Forums:        In English   Suomeksi   På svenska
afterdawn.com > forums > digital video > video to dvd > rendering withtmpegnc, ulead mf 2 too slow?
Show topics
 
Forums
Forums
Rendering withTMPEGnc, Ulead MF 2 Too Slow?
  Jump to:
 
Posted Message
Nifty
Newbie
_
5. April 2005 @ 13:18 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
I am using Windows XP, an ATI all in one wondercard 9800 Pro and an AMD Athelon 2000+, with 512 GB Ram.
After capturing about 1.5 hours I render the program using TMPEGnc 3.0 XP then I use TMPEGnc DVD Author before burning.
When I render the program using TMPEGnc 3XP it takes about 9 hours regardless of setting the output to DVD NTSC or XDVD NTSC. In both cases I am using VBR and I suspect I could save some time with CBR with the corresponding loss in quality.
The approx 9 hours to render seems excessive, is this the case?
Am I doing somthing wrong?
When I use Ulead Movie Factory 2 to render the same program it seems to only take about an hour. Is the output that much worse because it is so much quicker? I can see a difference but the source I am using is not good and it may be my imagination. Thanks
Advertisement
_
__
AfterDawn Addict
_
5. April 2005 @ 14:18 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
If the source isn't that good, then a 2 pass VBR encode, with the Motion Search Precision set to higest, or even high, it's a waste of time.
Set CQ-VBR and adjust average bitrate to what you want, then set Motion Search Precision to Estimate (fast).
Should cut the time in half, although quality will be about the same as ulead.
Tmpgenc is (one of) the slowest encoder(s) around. It just happens to be the most used, which is a shame, because there are much better and faster encoders for about the same money.

Black holes are where God divided by zero...
Cheers, Jim
Nifty
Newbie
_
5. April 2005 @ 14:53 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
I haven't purchased the TMPGEnc yet. I am using the trial version. What other decoders would you suggest. Thanks Again
Nifty
Newbie
_
5. April 2005 @ 15:25 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
OK after searching around a bit it seems different encoders do different things better or worse depending on the use. I took a look and a lot of users seem to use CCE, Mainconcept,Canopus Procoder Express, Virtual Dub, Ligos etc. what is your opinion?
Advertisement
_
__
 
_
AfterDawn Addict
_
5. April 2005 @ 15:58 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
Canopus Procoder first, then Mainconcept.
CCE has a VERY poor GUI. The others are either slow, or unsupported, or have too limited options.
Canopus Procoder Express is only $59, and one of the single best standalone encoders there is.
Mainconcept allows even more user flexibilty, and is very fast, but can be confusing for a beginner, although it does have templates (Canopus doesn't AFAIK), and has a built in file splitter for those SVCD encodes to two or three disks. I think it's about $100.

Black holes are where God divided by zero...
Cheers, Jim
afterdawn.com > forums > digital video > video to dvd > rendering withtmpegnc, ulead mf 2 too slow?
 

Digital video: AfterDawn.com | AfterDawn Forums
Music: MP3Lizard.com
Gaming: Blasteroids.com | Blasteroids Forums | Compare game prices
Software: Software downloads
Blogs: User profile pages
RSS feeds: AfterDawn.com News | Software updates | AfterDawn Forums
International: AfterDawn in Finnish | AfterDawn in Swedish | AfterDawn in Norwegian | download.fi
Navigate: Search | Site map
About us: About AfterDawn Ltd | Advertise on our sites | Rules, Restrictions, Legal disclaimer & Privacy policy
Contact us: Send feedback | Contact our media sales team
 
  © 1999-2025 by AfterDawn Ltd.

  IDG TechNetwork