So now I have these two tools "mencoder" and "ffmpeg" as "the" ultimate Tools to "To / Re-encode", ie convert of videos in a different format identified.
At least there are these tools synonymous for Win32 Platforms. Is there any other qualitative equivalent or similar powerful Tools? I still Transcode identified, but that is probably more of a pure Linux solution.
However, this is all still totally slay and so I have some questions ...
On the net I always find the expression the mencoder to ffmpeg the bervorzugen was. Why? I can here at my (still) simple Conversions after mpeg1 video and mp2 Audio no real differences. Only when mencoder example in the stands Windows Media Player: Audio codec "Unknown" btw: How can I change and mencoder instruct a corresponding synonymous Info into the mpg file writing? Hear the sound I despite the lack of info / specifying a Audio codecs?
I find on the net to claim the synonymous pass2 method was better. But I can not quite understand how this works? Both tools read the logs at the 2nd Run car or why the second Runs better then? In principle it is the same command - not? Writes About Is not? I think for example fmpeg The file "ffmpeg2pass-0.log Ask" in the current directory ... how does mencoder at this and how do I enter the explicitly (if ever) to?
One last question about my being used command lines. What do the Multimedia experts and enthusiasts about this:
Task: "Maximum" Picture quality at _einer_ CD (~ 700MB) and an appealing Skalierungsgroesse (~ 720x540 at 4:3) Sowei truncated empty margins and Use of mpeg1 video (~ 800kb) and mp2 (max.128kb/44100khz) Audio mpg1 in standard containers (one Video track and an audio track in stereo or Language)
in relation to the size I have to now and always erhoehen down the Video Bitrate approximated ...
For ffmpeg I:
--- snip --- IFIL set file.avi% set oFile file.mpg% set VCOD% mpeg1video CROP set croptop =- 0-cropbottom 0-cropleft 0-cropright 0 set SCALEr0x540 set SPC = 4:3 set FPS% set VBIT ¬ 0000 set ACOD% mp2 ABIT set 8000 set SRATED100 VOL% 6 set
REM for multi-pass 1 / 2: ffmpeg-i%%-IFIL vcodec VCOD%%%% CROP-SCALE% s%-aspect% ASP% r% b% FPS %% VBIT-pass 1-acodec ¬ OD%-ab "IT%-ar%-vol ARAT%% VOL% sameq OFile%% And REM ffmpeg ... Pass 2 ... --- snap ---
And for mencoder, I have so far:
--- snip --- IFIL set file.avi% set oFile file.mpg% set VCOD% mpeg1video set PASS = 1 CROP set = set SCALEr0: 540 set SPC = 4 / 3 set FPS% set VBIT ¬ 0 set ACOD% mp2 ABIT set 8 set SRATED100 VOL = 0 set
mencoder% IFIL-o%%% oFile ofps% FPS% of mpeg-ovc lavc-lavcopts vcodec =%% VCOD: vbitrate =%% VBIT: aspect =% ASP% vf crop =%% CROP, scale = SCALE%% harddup-oac lavc-lavcopts acodec = ¬ OD%: abitrate = "IT-sRate is used%%% sRate is used af - lavcresample =%% sRate is used, volume =% VOL%: 0
REM for multi-pass 1 / 2: mencoder% IFIL-o%%% oFile ofps% FPS% of mpeg-ovc lavc-lavcopts vcodec =%% VCOD: vbitrate =%% VBIT: aspect =% ASP%: vpass = 1-vf crop =%% CROP, scale = SCALE%% harddup-oac lavc-lavcopts acodec = ¬ OD%: abitrate = "IT-sRate is used%%% sRate is used af - lavcresample =%% sRate is used, volume =% VOL%: 0 And REM mencoder ... : = vpass 2 ...
Are these lines still Toppen to all Contingencies involved? Irritate me when Mencoder nor indication keyint and mbd = 2 as: http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/HTML/de/menc-feat-mpeg.html is to be seen ... Are these really necessary and what exactly?
For tips / criticism about this, I am open and are / is welcome.
Would perhaps be one or the other setting better and why a tool the other was preferable ...
Or whether synonymous exclude certain options Efekt and no longer in the combination have ...
What is with the order of options are
Antwort von Heiko Nocon:
Thomas Steinbach wrote:
> Is there any other qualitative > equivalent or similarly powerful > Tools? I still Transcode identified, but > that is probably more of a pure Linux solution.
Yes and no. Yes: Transcode is similarly powerful. No: It is not a pure Linux solution, but may be synonymous with Windows up and running market.
> I find on the net to claim the synonymous > pass2 method was better.
2pass. That is not always better, but only under certain Terms. The main condition is a limitation of the existing medium bit rate for the target material, eg material's Streaming by limited network bandwidth or simply because the generating a data file to specified size is not only somehow fit, but the available size synonymous nor optimally should exploit.
If enough bandwidth / space available, it does not second pass, but instead is compressed in the "CQ" mode. (constant quality). This has virtually the same beneficial effect for the Quality as 2pass encoding, just the average bitrate (or Size) is not predictable, because they examine the content of the coded Material depends.
