![tmpg video mastering works 6 provide mpg 1 tmpg video mastering works 6 provide mpg 1](https://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/images/tvmw6/package_tvmw6.png)
How do I shrink the audio and keep 6 ch sound ? VRD going from 448K AC3 6ch toġ92k AAC changes to 2ch. Wow, had never considered audio as a significant part of the file size.Ĭhanged VRD to 192K AAC audio instead of 448K and file sizesĪrrggg. Hope these options can be changed to make the needed shrink.Ĭlick to expand.Hmm, If I am reading this correctly there is nearly a 100 MB difference IDR frequency -Every I-frame is IDRįield order-Top field first Subpixel motion search depth-*Full,half,quarter pixel* HRD maintain-YesĮntropy coding mode-*CABAC*
![tmpg video mastering works 6 provide mpg 1 tmpg video mastering works 6 provide mpg 1](https://www.videohelp.com/softwareimages/tmpgenc_mpeg_editor_662.jpg)
Played with "preset" very fast to very slow. I marked * the options I recognized between this and my other programĬan't find "F1" help for these. "Double pass encoding"Įverything else is "intelligent" or "Auto". The files are PAL Dvd 720x576, 25fps -NO changes done to this. I am hoping there are setting here in "Advanced Encoding Parameters" I do think MC has improved considerably over the years, but I have no idea how it would compare today to TMPGenc.VRD does H264 files with 5.1ch sound (this new?)Īnd looks as good, is twice as FAST as my other X264 program TMPGEnc5.īUT the files are 20% bigger. Tried TMPGenc once a long time ago, nothing special compared to CC. At high bitrates all the encoders are probably pretty much identical. Nowadays I almost never do 2-hour projects on a single-layer disk and I almost never use CC any more. In later years I noted that unless I was really pushing a low bitrate then MC did fine and it certainly made my workflow faster, so I began using MC more. That average bitrate would correspond to a maximum of about two hours of video on a single-layer DVD, which I did on quite a few projects back then. Just now I pulled out a 2003 DVD I'd made of a choir tour to Austria, and my DVD player shows that in general the average bitrate is about 5-6Mb/sec, with excellent quality. I remember doing lots of tests with CC and MainConcept (this was back in 2003/4) and there was no comparison.
![tmpg video mastering works 6 provide mpg 1 tmpg video mastering works 6 provide mpg 1](https://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/images/tvmw6/panel_settings.png)
Wonderful control of all variables, and the ability to do a custom tweaking of any portion of the whole video. now i make h.264 blu-ray encoding with Adobe Media Encoder (DVD-A accepts 30i without recompress or errors) and with avisynth, i resize the HD to SD and encode with Carbon Coder for DVD.īack when I first got into making DVDs I used CinemaCraft exclusively. Videos where interpolated from 4:1:1 to 4:2:2 during or prior to encoding.ĮDIT: i used procoder for ages, a few years im using carbon coder (same "internals", but updated). (looks like procoder has its own internal filtering, mainly with lower bitrates, that result in good looking results, mainly low artifacts like mosquito noise even using filters in avisynth like Convolution3D to "stabilize" the video for better encoding, Procoder was better for 30i. others where "blocky", added compression noise, etc.Ĭinamacraft was very good and very fast for progressive sources, but not that good for interlaced content (even tweaking internal filters options to enhance visual). Most had problems with texture ("moving" static objects) and mosquito noise (mainconcept was the worse). (mix from various events i recorded)Įncoding with 4mbps with maximum quality possible by the encoders, 2 pass if available. tested with NTSC DV sources, 30i, static scenes, low motion scenes, texture motion, very detailed scenes.
#Tmpg video mastering works 6 provide mpg 1 plus
What baffles me here is that some of the "urban myth" quotes are from folks who jump through hoops to use handbrake plus other programmes.to get a better resize/encode than Vegas can provide. Trust me, I would NOT be bothering with it if not, especially as the TVW5 files do not smart render! That can be a real PITA. I can appreciate that there should be controlled environments etc for REAL bonafide testing, but for me, if I can drop a clip into both Vegas and TVW5 and see a difference EVERY time, that's good enough for me. Even though that was more expensive than the cheapos I stuck with that, more for the well known name than anything.
![tmpg video mastering works 6 provide mpg 1 tmpg video mastering works 6 provide mpg 1](https://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/images/press/tvmw7/tvmw7_image.png)
I tried out TMPGEnc video mastering works which also made a great job. To my surprise even some of the very cheap ($45 type) encoders made a better job than Vegas. Unfortunately the thread is too old to find in the 'search' now. Particularly jaggies on a bride's veil during the vows. But then a couple of years ago I had a job whereby the Vegas resize to DVD from HDV and HD REALLY looked poor. I'd always been happy enough with the Vegas re-size from HDV 50i to SD (DVD). I guess it can depend on the source footage.