DVD Quality problem

Geoffrey Cox · February 19th, 2010, 04:10 AM

Yes it does take that long - I've done it. Results are very good though. It is the de-interlacing that really ups the encoding time so if this isn't needed then the time is only a fraction of the rate described.

J. Chris Moore · February 19th, 2010, 12:29 PM

When would de-interlacing not be needed?

Geoffrey Cox · February 19th, 2010, 02:10 PM

I have found that some projects just don't need it due to the nature of the material but more importantly I've noticed that many modern DVD players do a very good job of real time de-interlacing - better than any processing of the file as it doesn't degrade the image in any noticeable way (the Toshiba I've got for instance). My knowledge is not good enough to know how they do it! Again though it does depend on the project and it only takes one awkward passage (normally of fast moving complex motion in my case) to make processing necessary.

J. Chris Moore · February 20th, 2010, 10:37 AM

Really what I am trying to figure out is if it will be an efficient workflow to try and produce wedding DVDs through compressor from HD footage. Typically the ceremony is anywhere from 20-45 min and the reception events sometimes 20- minutes along with the wedding day trailer. Lets say I have a total of 50 minutes of footage to compress, according to you guys to get quality DVD picture it would take 50 hours. Not to mention that I'm working on a 3.0 ghz duocore iMac. I only have a mac so the PC workflow really isn't a option and 50 hours or longer to compress a single project is insane. Any suggestions?

Robert Lane · February 20th, 2010, 01:26 PM

I've no idea where you're extracting those kind of runtimes from but...

On your machine using the best possible settings Compressor has to offer for MPEG-2 encoding should take between 4-9 hours depending on the actual speed of your system and exactly how deep you go with quality options. Not 50 hours.

As I always suggest to those trying to wrangle and fully understand how to use all of Compressor's settings - and when *not* to use them - pick up a copy of this book which is worth it's weight in Platinum!:

Amazon.com: Apple Pro Training Series: Compressor 3 Quick-Reference Guide (9780321514226): Brian Gary: Books

J. Chris Moore · February 23rd, 2010, 10:11 AM

Thanks Robert, just ordered the book from Amazon. Hopefully this will help clear up some things for me. Thanks for the help every one!

Joel Summers · February 23rd, 2010, 11:57 AM

Ha! I just ordered the book yesterday from Amazon. It looks like great minds do think alike. Keep us posted on the settings you use and I will do the same.

Thanks

-Joel

J. Chris Moore · February 23rd, 2010, 12:05 PM

Will do! Thanks!

By the way, I hope that I fall into the "great minds" category. LOL

J. Chris Moore · February 23rd, 2010, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Lane

I've no idea where you're extracting those kind of runtimes from but...

That figure came from mark's post that, for him it took compressor about one hour per minute to encode his project. Again, I'm a noobie here and maybe his setting and situation doesn't apply to what I'm trying to accomplish but I was simply applying his experience to my projected workflow. Most wedding projects will have somewhere around an hour of footage to encode therefore according to Mark it would take 60 hours at the one minute per hour encode rate.

However I think I'm going to wait and give the book you mentioned a once over and to some practice runs to gauge for myself the time involved to compress a typical wedding video.

Robert Lane · February 23rd, 2010, 08:15 PM

You certainly don't have to wait for the book, try doing some of your own test encodes. Take a 10-second clip from any segment and put it into it's own timeline. Fully render it, then send it to Compressor via whichever method you prefer and see how long it takes on your system.

If you run into trouble just let us know!

Floris van Eck · February 24th, 2010, 02:00 AM

If you turn on frame controls, rendering times get much longer. But the quality and sharpness also gets better (coming from HD).

I use a preset with a 2-way pass, at 8.54mbps (with a minimum of 6.2 if I recall correctly), with AIFF audio, motion controls on, details set to 20 and motion estimation set to best. For me, this produces the sharpest, crispiest looking .m2v files.

I did a test with both Compressor, Squeeze and Adobe Media Encoder, and the setting above is my 1st choice. AME and Squeeze fail to come close to it. You can add a lot of filters during the DVD encode in Squeeze, maybe that can have some impact.

With that having said, DVD encoding results on a Mac are very poor. On a PC, you can get better results with mostly free software. Adobe and Apple should do better than that.

Robert Lane · February 24th, 2010, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Floris van Eck

With that having said, DVD encoding results on a Mac are very poor. On a PC, you can get better results with mostly free software. Adobe and Apple should do better than that.

Read my earlier post in this thread why that statement is false and very misleading.

February 19th, 2010, 04:10 AM	#16
Geoffrey Cox Major Player Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Huddersfield, UK Posts: 469	Yes it does take that long - I've done it. Results are very good though. It is the de-interlacing that really ups the encoding time so if this isn't needed then the time is only a fraction of the rate described.

February 19th, 2010, 12:29 PM	#17
J. Chris Moore Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Roanoke, VA Posts: 96	When would de-interlacing not be needed?

February 19th, 2010, 02:10 PM	#18
Geoffrey Cox Major Player Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Huddersfield, UK Posts: 469	I have found that some projects just don't need it due to the nature of the material but more importantly I've noticed that many modern DVD players do a very good job of real time de-interlacing - better than any processing of the file as it doesn't degrade the image in any noticeable way (the Toshiba I've got for instance). My knowledge is not good enough to know how they do it! Again though it does depend on the project and it only takes one awkward passage (normally of fast moving complex motion in my case) to make processing necessary.

February 20th, 2010, 10:37 AM	#19
J. Chris Moore Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Roanoke, VA Posts: 96	Really what I am trying to figure out is if it will be an efficient workflow to try and produce wedding DVDs through compressor from HD footage. Typically the ceremony is anywhere from 20-45 min and the reception events sometimes 20- minutes along with the wedding day trailer. Lets say I have a total of 50 minutes of footage to compress, according to you guys to get quality DVD picture it would take 50 hours. Not to mention that I'm working on a 3.0 ghz duocore iMac. I only have a mac so the PC workflow really isn't a option and 50 hours or longer to compress a single project is insane. Any suggestions?

February 20th, 2010, 01:26 PM	#20
Robert Lane Go Go Godzilla Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ USA Posts: 2,823 Images: 15	I've no idea where you're extracting those kind of runtimes from but... On your machine using the best possible settings Compressor has to offer for MPEG-2 encoding should take between 4-9 hours depending on the actual speed of your system and exactly how deep you go with quality options. Not 50 hours. As I always suggest to those trying to wrangle and fully understand how to use all of Compressor's settings - and when not to use them - pick up a copy of this book which is worth it's weight in Platinum!: Amazon.com: Apple Pro Training Series: Compressor 3 Quick-Reference Guide (9780321514226): Brian Gary: Books

February 23rd, 2010, 10:11 AM	#21
J. Chris Moore Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Roanoke, VA Posts: 96	Thanks Robert, just ordered the book from Amazon. Hopefully this will help clear up some things for me. Thanks for the help every one!

February 23rd, 2010, 11:57 AM	#22
Joel Summers New Boot Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Aurora, IL Posts: 13	Ha! I just ordered the book yesterday from Amazon. It looks like great minds do think alike. Keep us posted on the settings you use and I will do the same. Thanks -Joel

February 23rd, 2010, 12:05 PM	#23
J. Chris Moore Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Roanoke, VA Posts: 96	Will do! Thanks! By the way, I hope that I fall into the "great minds" category. LOL

February 23rd, 2010, 08:15 PM	#25
Robert Lane Go Go Godzilla Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ USA Posts: 2,823 Images: 15	You certainly don't have to wait for the book, try doing some of your own test encodes. Take a 10-second clip from any segment and put it into it's own timeline. Fully render it, then send it to Compressor via whichever method you prefer and see how long it takes on your system. If you run into trouble just let us know!

February 24th, 2010, 02:00 AM	#26
Floris van Eck Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 993	If you turn on frame controls, rendering times get much longer. But the quality and sharpness also gets better (coming from HD). I use a preset with a 2-way pass, at 8.54mbps (with a minimum of 6.2 if I recall correctly), with AIFF audio, motion controls on, details set to 20 and motion estimation set to best. For me, this produces the sharpest, crispiest looking .m2v files. I did a test with both Compressor, Squeeze and Adobe Media Encoder, and the setting above is my 1st choice. AME and Squeeze fail to come close to it. You can add a lot of filters during the DVD encode in Squeeze, maybe that can have some impact. With that having said, DVD encoding results on a Mac are very poor. On a PC, you can get better results with mostly free software. Adobe and Apple should do better than that.