Dissatisfied with converting my art, would like to hear your opinion
Frage von Kenshin: September 2007
Hi!
Currently I'm busy TV Programs with a DVD recorder, then ripping s.PC and nartürlich to convert. But as was apparent in the title, I am not satisfied with what I convert s.Ende and what comes out. To be more precise to say the file is too big to me somewhere for the quality of the s.Ende comes out especially when the image quality because the sound quality is best, even on really well (so far obtained by reducing the sound quality could save space (but I do not know how the sound quality is reduced)).
Ex: I have a 800 MB Vob. File and convert it with the program AutoGK which is actually quite good (or?). I would like to improve the quality of something simple and click on 100% quality. With the setting of the codec either xvid or Divx xvid should I take with me because apparently Divx is not installed (should I do or times?). It converts and therefore the result in this example would be an approximately 1.5 GB of large files (from original 800MB) to just 33 minutes duration and the quality is barely noticeable change seems to have been. If I then enter normal values, we say the 30 minutes Vob. 500-600 MB file onto umkonvertiere (with xvid) then the result is not synonymous exhilarating. I've more or less the feeling that my Avi. the Vob files. Files are hardly superior.
I have now attempted to describe, maybe someone knows where my problem lies, or else has a tip for me? I would be very grateful ...
mfg!
Antwort von robbie:
Small approach:
Where is the extra quality that you after your conversion to Xvid want? Metaphor: you want with a mug in 1l water, a bucket vollfüllen, 2l of water space.
For better quality you have to get in a better quality recording (no, mpeg2 from your DVD - Recorder is far not the best).
In this sense,
Antwort von Gast 0815:
The goal of a conversion is generally shrinking the file size without compromising too much to lose s.Qualität. It seems to me you are changing only s.den nothing AutoGK default settings? In Step 3, you can but the desired Size of the output file set, consider this first if you have to burn a CD or DVD and want to choose a function of the length of the output file a suitable format. For 33 minutes it would be as a CD (anyway if no other film this is, you can place synonymous fully exploited) or for several movies or episodes 1 / 5 or 1 / 6 DVD-length, this setting is under 'Predefined size'. In order to reduce the sound, Step 4 -> Advanced Settings and select output audio type CBR> MP3 according to claim 128 or better. DivX / xvid makes little difference, so stay calm in xvid. AutuGK advantage of small files, Quälitätsverlust disadvantage.
Alternatively, you may also synonymous but it create a DVD, with a commercial video editing program, or synonymous with freeware: demux the file (eg with DGindex), cut (eg mpeg2schnitt) and then (possibly together with other episodes) to a DVD processing (eg DVDstyler, Gui_DVDauthor).; Advantage: no loss of quality, the disadvantage of higher space consumption) on disk;
Greetings from Marburg
Antwort von PowerMac:
1 plus 0 different from 2
Antwort von robbie:
gast @ 0815 Have you understood what he wanted? He wants more quality from low quality magic. Since it uses nothing, if you enumerate his settings. It is used in the source material is still not better!
Antwort von Gast 0815:
Robbie @ about the quality you have right of course: Conversion leads to loss of quality, giving: Evaporate with xvid and co. is only in order to optimize disk space (when sought as little loss of quality) nonsensical. Therefore synonymous Detailed my point 2 as the common handling alternative. An Optimization of TV material can Einzellfall course still be obstinate, for example, if you look at the adventurous part of the standard transformations watches TV channel (http://home.arcor.de/scharfis_brain/ExotischesInterlacing/), a codec / container is removable, however, for something as a tool entirely inappropriate.
Greetings from Marburg
Antwort von Daigoro:
Was there a similar issue has not already?
For me it sounds as if the material in between MPG2 not been particularly high (television signal and then into the 'obsolete' MPG2). And things then compressed again to compress leads to worse results than if you like the raw material into the target format.
Can the DVD recorder is not equal to DivX / Xvid record? That would be a step-saving conversion. Or simply MPG2 with lower data rate, which would then not as efficient as DivX, but quality is slightly better than the 2x umkovertiert / compressed.
Quote:
Conversion leads to loss of quality, giving: Evaporate with xvid and co. is only in order to optimize disk space (when sought as little loss of quality) nonsensical.
That works out at Evaporate good quality raw material is still somewhat, but here it seems to me the problem with multiple conversion to lie.
Antwort von asa:
In addition, television via DVB T / S / C is already MPEG2 encoded.
Antwort von Kenshin:
I would now thank you but still a few questions. What is MPEG2? The files after recording are "vob." Is not what is MPEG2 or MPEG2?
With the recorder record is not the best choice (quality)? What would be the best option for quality list?
How do I see if my divx recorder can record? Effects in the settings so far found nothing similar.
Thanks in advance! You are truly competent!
Antwort von Markus73:
"Kenshin" wrote:
The files after recording are "vob." Is not what is MPEG2 or MPEG2?
This is the same. VOB is just a specially standardized "packaging", the quasi-DVD version of MPEG2.
Quote:
How do I see if my divx recorder can record?
Instructions, technical data, menu ...?
Quote:
Effects in the settings so far found nothing similar.
Well, then he's obviously not.
Gruß, Markus
Antwort von Kenshin:
and which variant is now better quality than my DVD recorder?
Antwort von Markus73:
"Kenshin" wrote:
and which variant is now better quality than my DVD recorder?
What do you mean with "which version"? What alternatives are available because the debate? Qualitatively, there is in MPEG2 / VOB really nothing to moan, appropriate settings, times required.
Gruß, Markus
Antwort von Kenshin:
Hi Mark, I refer to this rate of Robbie (the very top of the thread)
"robbie" wrote:
(no, mpeg2 from your DVD - Recorder is far not the best).
mfg
Antwort von robbie:
Yes, but I think for further processing. If you have this DVD will ONLY want to watch (which, of course, converting to another format exclude), then directly from a DVD recorder so you always "good enough".
Antwort von Markus:
"Kenshin" wrote:
Hi Mark, I refer to this rate of Robbie (the very top of the thread)
"robbie" wrote:
(no, mpeg2 from your DVD - Recorder is far not the best).
Although I am not the main Markus, but I still answer times.
The quote is more of a theoretical statement. There are numerous recording formats, which can deliver better quality than MPEG2 to offer. However, it is preferably to format the picture only slightly compressed and thus require much space.
For normal television fun (!) MPEG2 is always sufficient quality and perfectly okay. One should not only the data to greatly reduce, that is, the recording time is not too much higher number s.den values align. As a guide, one can say that an ordinary DVD recorder 2 hours of video in good quality on a DVD can burn.
Antwort von Kenshin:
Other Hi Markus!
Yes with his DVD recorder can record 2 hours HQ if you have a double layer disc has.
Verra me but what better recording formats there are and how and with what I'm recording this?
Thanks in advance!
Antwort von Markus73:
"Kenshin" wrote:
Yes with his DVD recorder can record 2 hours HQ if you have a double layer disc has.
Even on a single-layer DVD to get 2 hours in a fairly decent quality (meaning as a video DVD with MPEG2 / VOB).
Quote:
Verra me but what better recording formats there are and how and with what I'm recording this?
Since you have to first tell us what exactly you with "better" mean. MPEG2 will be a very good quality, how to you like so synonymous has already said. If you record MPEG2 and with the quality're not satisfied, then do you do something wrong, it's s.Format at least not lie.
Even "better" in terms of greater compression, smaller files so close to comparable quality, provide only MPEG4, DIVX, XVID, etc.
I am but from your previous posts do not become clear if you now go to a small file or to seek a high image quality.
Gruß, Markus
Antwort von Kenshin:
So Mark, I would like to achieve the highest possible image quality, sorry but what is it now so difficult to understand? Robbie said: "Is better than your DVD recorder" and I asked before hours: "Yes what?"
Can anyone answer this simple question? Thank you
Also I am looking for people for my ICQ Kontakliste, if I have questions and so, who would like to Add? Maybe I can help so synonymous times or so ^ ^
Quite so stupid that I'm not at all
Antwort von Wotan:
The thread was of the wrong approach Page! I hope I can do here and help educate and Kenshin auszdrücken properly. Most of the respondents expected to be objective is not understood, furthermore, he has never really be corrected or told what he really wants ... so I try now to interpret:
"Kenshin" wrote:
... simply click on 100% quality .... The result is a. Ca 1.5 GB large file (800MB from originally) to just 33 minutes duration ... the quality seems barely noticeable changes to have been
So after the encoding of MPEG2 to XVID (MPEG4) is it the quality or "too good", even though they have been for him umcodierung not noticeably changed. He can calm a bit s.Quali for small data loss .... However, he has a Kollossalen mistake because I almost always MPEG2 for laymen without noticeable loss of quality can convert to MPEG4. A question of attitudes, the video would not otherwise be bigger.
"Kenshin" wrote:
... the sound quality is best, even on really well (so far obtained by reducing the sound quality could save space (but I do not know how to reduce the sound quality })...
... he really just wants less data and is quite prepared something s.Qualität playfulness.
"Kenshin" wrote:
I've more or less the feeling that my Avi. the Vob files. Files are hardly superior.
This is probably the most confusing. What he probably wants is to achieve what one knows of xvid downloads: 750MB per movie in 1.5 hours of very good quality.
... Unfortunately I know neither XVID encoder accurate, nor thy AutoGK. But precisely here lies the problem. If you have not intentionally Komprimierst sound like you're saying is probably synonymous here are the worm in it. It is surely just as video codec settings in AutoGK synonymous audio settings. Bräuchstest Then you only have an MP3 encoder and make 90% or so quality and finish. However, there are certainly more people with the XVID codec settings or familiar with AutoGK and hopefully links to help you can give this, right? ;-) Or even a program that others in the forum which you can hire a friend by analyzing the perfect settings for movies on SVCD quality similar to auto find? Quasi-perfect quality / data rate setting for movies on 1 or 2 CDs to bring ...
As always synonymous, I hope that helps even more with a :-)
"Kenshin" wrote:
What is better than my DVD recorder?
(Sorry for Sinn Proposed rate, serves more than sense, section ...) Better than your DVD recorder is of course an equal DIVX Encodes and so many many hours of material on a DVD brings. Tell you I can not, because I would not buy, I do not draw on FS, it's synonymous online services such as OnlineTVRecorder. Per TV card you could of course choose the codec is included with dems but TV card is ne other league and has made me never works without problems and you have to employ so much more intense than with his stand.
"Kenshin" wrote:
Also I am looking for people for my ICQ Kontakliste, if I have questions and so, who would like to Add? Maybe I can help so synonymous times or so ^ ^
That will not play, which I have the last time with 16 and made the man sekkiert me 10 years later still with the same issues, I bet most of you have such experiences ... ;-)
Antwort von Kenshin:
Thanks Wotan! So what I want?
1. Let us so I know movies from the Internet are really top quality have really HQ! The HQ was taking my recorder and then Vob. Files auf'm next laptop there is not so good. Therefore I thought I would ask the time or Robbie synonymous generally what he meant with "your DVD recorder is still not the best.
2. And I want good quality synonymous with not much space so clearly, I can euch ja mal an example file, a video show with its settings in terms of quality and file size, I would be quite happy. And I hope someone can tell me how I can create such file. Thank you!
http://www.gigasize.com/get.php?d=mqk03l9kj9b
I want my files would then be just as synonymous in the Internet's place and with others. And what do you mean with "it will not play"? I will not pester rum would just like my ICQ list, with 1-2 people to fill in very well with computer knowledge and so :-) It's not bad, even had times of a high animal irgendner hardware or software in the ICQ me has helped but I have unfortunately deleted :-( Bin synonymous something more creative than just convert, make zb. Gif.s or like video and photo editing and sowas :-)
Antwort von Wotan:
Times change very quickly in your last answer something that people here synonymous support and what is not illegal. What exactly you want to do is unintressant, main ash there is no sharing of material that does not belongs to you ...
Antwort von Kenshin:
Can you not just as normal reply? It is also not illegal. What is in this link has nothing to do with the Page Slashcam more to do.
Antwort von Wotan:
You want to share and that is illegal, just believe me. Last chance to help is if your last 2 posts I change and then synonymous doing, otherwise the issue fell.
Antwort von derpianoman:
"PowerMac" wrote:
1 plus 0 different from 2
People, what your post here as the Wild Center, if PowerMac but the solution long ago announced?
Antwort von Wotan:
"PowerMac" wrote:
1 plus 0 different from 2
... synonymous with his short sentence so you can apparently read between the lines ...
Antwort von Markus73:
"Kenshin" wrote:
So Mark, I would like to achieve the highest possible image quality, sorry but what is it now so difficult to understand? Robbie said: "Is better than your DVD recorder" and I asked before hours: "Yes what?"
That was "so difficult to understand" that it all has been said, what sense can answer.
I try again a summary:
- MPEG2 is in a position to deliver excellent image quality, in principle, for your project entirely sufficient - MPEG4 / DIVX etc provide comparable high quality with smaller file - If you are with the quality delivered by the recorder VOBs're not satisfied, then you are using inappropriate settings, the recorded signal was already bad, or your recorder can do no better. On MPEG2 but in principle it is not. - You will not be a bad VOB by converting to another file get better - As of Robbie the comment was meant, since I can only guess, maybe he says weakly compressed format like DV-AVI, but might just make sense. Especially if you made a digital recording source, you will receive the program already as MPEG2.
The only times to the principles. Your project is as mentioned above is not legally ok, so no concrete indications of more to me to implement.
