DVD Encoding

[Bruce Gruber]

Ok so what I am getting out of this so far is to Start with. 1920x180 Capture. The edit in PPCS3 or what ever. Now here ie the question.

1. I output to the same as the project to CF.avi.
2. Use that file and tkae it to HDlink if I want to down sizes to DVD 720x480 or do I take the orginal HDCF file srtaight to Encore or tempeg? Now PPCS3 and or 4 allow you to rescale via the export file to media encoder there you can select the Cineform encoder do you see anyting wrong with using that rather then the HDlink or is it the same.
3. If I want to go BD I go straight to Encore CS4 or tempeg with my HD high quality CF file?

[Bruce Gruber]

Another question.

If I capture 1920x1080 square when converting to BD do I use upper fiels. And wehn converting to SD DVD do I use lower fields or progressive?

But in interlaced I get sever jagged edges not I did not master in 1920x1080 I did not try that.

[Ivan Seso]

Bruce,

All depends on the field order from your cam (I think it is should be UFF). HDLink will not change your field order and it will stay UFF which is right (if you don’t choose deinterlace).

I am not sure which cam you have. If you have HDV, it is UFF.

I am also not sure which encoder and software you have. Some encoders can be confused with field orders and can’t recognize it well on input. Some encoders even can’t proper transform from UFF tu LFF.

I am with Vegas and I know its behaviour with field orders. But I don’t know for your encoder.

But, my advice would be – if you are making interlaced video (no matter SD, or BluRay, or whatever) stay from the begging to the end with UFF (check it on input and outputs of all your programs and change if needed) – so stay with field order of your cam. You can change field order if you want, but there is no need for that and you should know behaviour of you encoder.

Also, if you make progressive (you checked deinterlace in HDLink) stay from the begging to the end with No Fields or Progressive (check it and change if needed on inputs and on outputs of all your programs).

If that don’t works for you, you should experiment with your programs and remember what is working for you. If one option don’t, the second probably will. No matter, if you are doing progressive or interlaced - but there souldn’t be any jaggies if everything is done right and if you or your encoder didn’t make something wrong with field orders.

And, I tried a little how Cineform deinterlace. It does it very good and I never saw such a good deinterlacing from any software. But, for HD I will still stay in interlaced if I shoot intelaced (because if I want progressive I can shoot progressive). For SD, it would maybe be good idea to do progressive (even if your shoot interlaced HD), although I was very happy with interlaced SD outputs.

I hope that somebody will now not say that I am interlaced man. I would like progressive, but 50p. With 25p, interlaced vs progressive is still so, so. All depends on material. And I am not Blu-Ray man. I am much more fisherman. I would give to fishing rods prior to new HDV cam and all what goes with it. But, you must live in reality and get what they give to you. Now, it is BluRay and it looks better than SD on big TVs - tommorow who knows.


Well, it seems me and Bruce are the only ones in this discussion. I thing it is because there is much problems wtih new 210 build releases. And me, with Vegas 8c also seem to have different behaviour with new releases (on worse, I think).

[Bruce Gruber]

Thanks Ivan,
I am new to HD I just bought sony fx1000 (second cam) and Z5U so I am HDV shooting 1080 60i I need to test other settigns, and I use premier Pro CS3 and 4 all the way. I was looking at tempeg but I like the Encore menues. Can I use tempeg to just create MPEG-2 file and bring that into Encore? Will encore try to transcosde>

Any way I have been trying to figure out the settings in Encore and exactly how the work and how they affect you output. I am total clueless on what the GOP setting are for? I just leave them set to default.

My hobby was high end audio/video and as long as I can remember they we pushing the progressive thing I have an LCD 120hz I know plasma are better but my room is very bright so I went with LCD. I did notice the interlaced leaves some jagged edges and quite a bit more banding ( we call it that in the photography world) oh did I forget to mention I am a photographer to.

I stumbled upon Cinefrom thru looking thru some form after I was shocked how lousy SD dvd looked coming straigh off my HD camars and compressing with Adobe!!!! SO I tried a quick test with CF and I was amazed at the differance in quality I was hooked and bought it.. I am very interested in having the best HD output for BR but right now, I am trying to get the Best SD output for my clients. BR is my next step.

I will do more testing based on your and Stephens input and who ever esle wants to jump in. Your advise is very good.. Oh I am not worried about speed or file size..

[Stephen Armour]

Sorry I've had little time to comment here again, and since we've not suffered enough yet with BR, have little to add to that.

Just a comment on banding:

One of the reasons we decided CF was important, was trying to preserve a little of our 8-bit video without banding, (even if it already was introduced by the MPEG2 compression). Again I repeat: If you can capture (like with a BM Intensity board) direct from the camera before that MPEG2 compression is applied, and you keep it square pixel and bump to 10bit, you'll hardly ever see banding. HDMI or SDI out of the cam is a good way to go for that.

Since we often have multi-generational trips thru CS3/SC4 with our video, and use quite a bit of VFX and color correction, this is the only way we can do it half way decently. Without CF, our final video does not look near as good, I assure you.

Even with CF, without capturing directly from the camera, our chromakey work is difficult. We have a couple of Sony V1's that can capture via the HDMI port, however, which allows us to bypass most of the MPEG2 compression (and is compressed directly by CF).

[Ivan Seso]

Bruce,

I realy don’t know how Encore looks like and will it transcode again. As I can understand from you, Encore is for authoring. You shouldn’t give any authoring program to render or rerender your video. It should be done only once and in good mpeg2 encoder – in program which is only for encoding and have nothing to do with authoring. I do it with Vegas which is solid and has Mainconcept encoder. I know Vegas is not ideal to encoding, or there are better encoders out there, so to be more sure, I always use the highest settings.

After you make your final video, you must find something which will author that for BluRay or DVD, but which will not try to rerender again. For DVD it wil be not problems, but for BluRay it may be, and internet is full of such a sad stories.

For BluRay authoring I found that Uleads are great. They have Movie Factories 6 and 7 and Video Studio which is beside authoring good for editing. You need only one of them because they all have more or less the same authoring templates. Ulead MF7 would be ideal. Good with Uleads is that they accept everything, author that without rerendering and everything after that without any problems plays on PS3 (and most other players). I tried Ulead with AVCHD, also not problems at all. Problems here means – it wants to rerender and you don’t want.

I don’t believe that you will have problems if you do your works in 1920x1080, High Level. But, many authoring programs have problems and want to rerender if your video is 1440x1080 High-1440 level. So, why than some people speak that HDV is fully compatible with Blu Ray. Maybe it is, but on special way and not for everyone.

For example, Uleads, when authoring, will not rerender HDV High-1440 level video, but Vegas Architect and Nero 8 will. None of them will rerender 1920x1080 High Level Video. Isn’t that little crazy?

As for Tmpgenc (now much modern Tmpgenc Xpress) it was my first love in mpeg2 encoding. I do encoding now with Vegas because I think it is more practical to do everything in one program and because I believe that for my works I wouldn’t see any difference between Vegas and Tmpgenc mpeg2 encoding. I believe that new modern Tmpgenc Xpress is even better mpeg2 encoder than Vegas now and with more settings. But I think Vegas is very OK. Before, Tmpgenc was very slow (but always very good if the not best quality for the money).

As for GOPs – I can tell you default GOPs from Vegas and I never had problems with such a made GOPs. For NTSC (I am PAL) GOP is long 15, with 2 B pictures in GOP, so it looks like IBBPBBP.... For NTSC and in Vegas GOPs looks like that and are the same for HDV and for so called Full HD Blu Ray templates.


Stephen,

Unfortunately, there is no chance and it would be unpractical for me to capture video before compression. I read about that and my cam could do that, but it is unpractical for me - you know – I am filming outside just for hobby and not in studio. So my realitty will be HDV video from tape.

I found great benefits with HDLink and its upscaling and downscaling. I found that I don’t lose anything as long as I am in Cineform. But, you know, I must go to DVD or Blu Ray (I think I will not use so much AVCHD). I like to correct my video in post. Do you think that Cineform still can make a big benefit to workflow like mine, especially in terms of corrections made to video in post ?

[Stephen Armour]

... I do it with Vegas which is solid and has Mainconcept encoder.

I believe Encore also uses the Mainconcept encoder, but for us, it's mostly a matter of checking our quality before making the DVD. Encore does not have to re-encode mpg's done outside.

Stephen, Unfortunately, there is no chance and it would be unpractical for me to capture video before compression. I read about that and my cam could do that, but it is unpractical for me - you know – I am filming outside just for hobby and not in studio. So my realitty will be HDV video from tape.

I found great benefits with HDLink and its upscaling and downscaling. I found that I don’t lose anything as long as I am in Cineform. But, you know, I must go to DVD or Blu Ray (I think I will not use so much AVCHD). I like to correct my video in post. Do you think that Cineform still can make a big benefit to workflow like mine, especially in terms of corrections made to video in post ?

If you do any color corrections or VFX (even transitions lilke dissolves), the wavelet compression and 10bit padding used on your Cineformed video will help preserve your video's "apparent" quality (what you'll see will look better). It gives you some additional headroom and helps to minimize banding, especially using CF's 32bit filters. I'm speaking about working through Prospect and CS3/4 now, as we don't use Vegas and don't know if any CF filters are included.

You could still get banding, if Vegas has any 8bit filters and you use them. I don't know the answer to that, but some of the Vegas geeks here most certainly do. Maybe a quick forum search could also answer that.

[Ivan Seso]

Thanks Stephen,

I am new here, I read almost whole Cineform forum in last 15 days and my head is full of data. I remember some people were discussing about Vegas and Cineform and the conclusions were something like: yes, but not so like with CS3/4. I will try come back on that treads and carefully read again. And maybe somebody read this tread and answer something.

Anyway, if I invest in Cineform it will be NeoHD (not Scene) because it gives me much more than a half of benefits and it gives me something for sure. And one is also sure, I will not change Vegas for CS or anything else because it would kill me.

Or, my wife would do that. You know, read about cam, read about new cams, read about PS3, read about PC, read about plasma best settings and calibrating, read about all that software, go and look what is Cineform, now Vegas 9 is out and you should read that also.....you must read too much and you read much more than you shoot with your cam - and before 8 months I knew almost everything (about SD).

And you must read, because if you don't - you really very easy can be hooked like Bruce said. Well, I think that he means by that - that he is hooked in possitive way. It is really hard to choose everything right with this HD video today. Like I said before, internet is full of sad stories. People are rendering and rerendering few times, buying too cheap cams but too expensive PCs after that (instead conversely), or rendering with low settings because of too slow PCs, and so on.

But, is it always here on this forum like nowadays - I mean, in big hurry - build 209, than 210, now when I connected I saw 211 is out and new treads about "new issues" ?

What I saw is - with old builds (versions 3) everything worked like a charm for me with my PC and Vegas. I tried build 210 and I saw that when I transform m2t file with new HDLink in Cineform and import that in Vegas 8 and watch that Cineform file in Vegas Histogram - video is without Superblacks and Supewhites - all under 16 and above 235 is gone. Also, it seems that HDLink likes to crash and it is not so stable like before.

I also saw that all my players on PC now play SD 720x576 Cinefom.avi video like 4:3 (but video is PAL Widescreen). I swear, before was everything OK. What is interesting, seems that First Light works OK for me, although most complaints here were on First Light.

Also, I am not thinking about Vegas 9 yet but it is normaly get it one day, but people on that forums say - don't buy Vegas 9 if you use Cineform - wait for Vegas 9a.

It seems that using First Light, much more than filters in Vegas, would compensate for Vegas 8 bit filters. Am I right here?

[Stephen Armour]

Ivan, I know what you mean! I've been doing this stuff for a long time, have read many hundreds of articles and studied the ins and outs of it, but our brains (at least mine...) only hold so much info and for just so long. If you get away from it for even just a little while, you can end up buying into a mess. Even if you DO stay up, you can buy into tech that is a dead end street. The world just doesn't stop, and it makes your head spin to try to plug into all that data!!

The truth is, if a previous CF version worked better for you, you can always go back to it. Sometimes w've had to do that in the past.

We're trying this latest Prospect 4K build out now, but see my thread with Dave N. on what I'm finding on some things. I still stand by getting the best results for DVD through using a fullsize CFHD downscaled and converted back to MPEG2 in TMPGEnc. They simply look great.

As to First Light, it would seem you are correct for color. Since it is nondestructive, it's very attractive and if the final output matches the First Light adjustments, CF has a real cost/benefit winner. And that tech will only grow as resolutions go up and 3D comes in.

I can't compare Vegas, as the last version I tried was a very early one, but with CS3 Adobe finally got their act together. If they can fix CS4 to be decent, it will fly us even higher. Combined with CF, we can do now what Hollywood did a very few years ago, with a PC and for many hundreds of thousands of dollars less! With that, the whole video production scene has changed radically. Even the "big guys" at Discovery and other major players are paying attention now.

[Bruce Gruber]

Stephen/Ivan

I have been out for a few days...

First I still have not figure out your comment about the DVD authoring.. I have been most confused by this and have been trying to figure it all out and I think I agree with you but let me know If I am wrong.

When I capture with CF say 1920x1080 square and edit in CS3/cs4 and export to CF.avi wheather it be full 1920x1080 or 720x480 using CF avi selection in PP formatt option that is just lik using HD link correct?

Now I have a CF high quality AVI.. something has to transcode that and make it a mpeg-2 file. That is what I use Encore for not only To author the DVD but something has to compress it and conver it to mpeg-2 correct ( I think this is the most important step correct)? If I bring the file into Encore as a mpeg-2 I do not think encore will want to transcode the file because it is mpeg-2.. Correct? SO somewhere you need to compress/transcod/render the file to make the DVD/BR disc. For this step I think you are saying you use (Tmpgenc) now you have a mpeg-2 and I can bring that into Encoe to author my DVD with out transcoding again just create menus and comppile DVD format?

Ivan you are correct I am trying to do everyting fight the first time! I am trying to use the best from the start not cutting corners ( well within reason)

[Bruce Gruber]

Ivan/Stephen

What settings do you use in TMPGEnc/express I am taking your advise and trying it but when I bring the MPEG file into Encore is wants to re-transcode?

[Ivan Seso]

Bruce,

It is hard for me to help you because I don’t use Encore and Tmpgenc Xpress. And I am PAL, you are NTSC. I believe you are talking about authoring for DVD here. But I am glad that you are happy with Stephen’s advice and how Tmpgenc is encoding for mpeg2.

I said, I don’t have Premiere Pro CS and Encore CS, but I believe it is something like when you have Sony Vegas and Sony Architect (or TmpgencXpress and Tmpgenc Authoring Works for example).

First ones are (in normal situations) better for mpeg2 encodings, second ones are for authoring (they can also encode if you want – but in normal situations you don’t want that). So, I believe that it is good decision to use Encore only for authoring, because you can always find better than that for encoding (if Encore is for authoring).

For example, I would never use Sony Architect for encoding if I have Vegas Pro, no matter for me if some people speak that it is also very good and how to encode with Architect (I even don’t read such a things).

What is not clear to me (because I don’t have any experience with Premiere) is why you don’t like to encode for mpeg2 with Premiere Pro (is it some problem with it and it don’t do it goood ?).

To help you, you should at least tell people which settings did you use in Tmpgenc. Anyway, maybe they couldn’t help you because they don’t know what Encore is thinking about that because they don’t have Encore.

The fact is, that Encore thinks that your stream from Tmpgenc is not legal. The fact is also that Tmpgenc for sure can make legal streams for Encore but you must find an answer. Some authoring programs are more strict here than other. Some accept everything (that’s why like ULEADs), some don’t – so, who will know ? – only people who tried both (Tmpgenc and Encore).

If nobody here can’t help you, my best advice for you is to try with little examples (10-20 sec. long) starting with default Tmpgenc templates, then change some settings and use the best method so called trial and error to see what is going on.

Because, for DVD there really shouldn’t be any problems with authoring – with trial and error you will find an answer alone, believe me. BluRay is still little different story, but things are getting better and better here also.

And try some other authoring programs to see is it problem with Tmpgenc or Encore. Maybe would be good idea to try one Tmpgenc authoring program (Tmpgenc Authoring Works are for Blu Ray and DVD authoring) to see would it also wants to reencode mpeg2 stream from TmpgencXpress or not.

[Bruce Gruber]

HI Ivan/Stephen sorry I guess it would help if I did give some information. I have Adobe PPCS3 and CS4 alon with Adobe Encore CS3/CS4 Right now I am testing Tmpgenc 4.0 express and it is awsome!! I can not believe The quality if the 16x9 SD quality that comes out of it and I am now trying my first BD as I type this email.

The problem I am having is after I run my CF.avi master thru Tmpgenc When I go to import it into Encore both versions it crashes about 3 or 4 time then finally accepts it. ENCORE CS3 Doesnot want to retranscode it does see it as a valide mpe-2 file my setting for now I am using the simple setting NTSC/ 720X480 30 FPS CBR 9 MPEGLAYER2 OR DOLBY DIGITAL.

[Bruce Gruber]

HI Ivan/Stephen sorry I guess it would help if I did give some information. I have Adobe PPCS3 and CS4 alon with Adobe Encore CS3/CS4 Right now I am testing Tmpgenc 4.0 express and it is awsome!! I can not believe The quality if the 16x9 SD quality that comes out of it and I am now trying my first BD as I type this email.

The problem I am having is after I run my CF.avi master thru Tmpgenc When I go to import it into Encore both versions it crashes about 3 or 4 time then finally accepts it. ENCORE CS3 Doesnot want to retranscode it does see it as a valide mpe-2 file my setting for now I am using the simple setting NTSC/ 720X480 30 FPS CBR 9 MPEGLAYER2 OR DOLBY DIGITAL.

I see all the other fine tune setting but I have not learned them or even know what they do maybe you could share some of your settings

CS4 IS A PROBLEM I am not getting any audio from the preview or when I burn the disc?? I think it is really stupid why would CS3 WORK AND NOT CS4?? I am using encore because it came with Adobe Premier pro.

You are correct once once i encode with Tmp I do not want to re encode less is better!! I am not sure why but Adobes encoder is just not that good.. I thought when I went HD 2 months ago it would be no probelm to get SD DVD but I was really wrong!

[Jack Laurie]

Stephen,
In reg to your good experiences going from hd to sd..... is the advice to upscale 1440x1080 files to 1920 still good when using acvhd files (m2ts from hg10)? I'm using hdlink prospecthd v4. I think I read they are 1920 if I could bring them in hdmi (don't have a card for that)