Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another quality comparison using SPIDERMAN

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • UncasMS
    Super Moderator
    • Nov 2001
    • 9047

    #16
    you're right, donpipo, the procoder2 results are darker

    it is not procoder, who is to blame, though, but the missing avs option "convert to yuy2" which was unchecked in my comparison

    with yuy2 on the picture is normal again in terms of brightness and contrast


    and no, neither hc nor cce were used in opv mode as i'd rather consider this comparing apples to oranges

    Comment

    • donpipo
      Junior Member
      Junior Member
      • Feb 2006
      • 5

      #17
      it's not only darker, it's darker in dark areas and brighter in bright areas
      i dont know if it is a colorspace matter
      i just see details are effectively been trade

      just have a look at the windows and curtains in the background (especially on the right) of this still for instance:
      http://www.digital-digest.com/~uncasms/spiderman/32647_b_pro_jpg.html
      compared to any of the others
      Last edited by donpipo; 5 Apr 2006, 08:31 PM.

      Comment

      • donpipo
        Junior Member
        Junior Member
        • Feb 2006
        • 5

        #18
        and, btw, thanks for the OPV answer.
        i was thinking that would help making the recoding faster without hurting quality but unfortunately it's not

        Comment

        • UncasMS
          Super Moderator
          • Nov 2001
          • 9047

          #19
          i havent noticed trade-ins in the sharpness but then on the other hand i only used opv with high bitrates

          and yes, the procoder results were a colourspace matter

          Comment

          • techreactor
            Banned
            • Jul 2005
            • 1309

            #20
            Originally Posted by UncasMS
            i havent noticed trade-ins in the sharpness but then on the other hand i only used opv with high bitrates
            UncasMS, can you share your experience on this. What threshold of Avg/High bitrates in your experience works good with OPV ???.

            Also if you can remember the time savings using OPV.

            Comment

            • UncasMS
              Super Moderator
              • Nov 2001
              • 9047

              #21
              since i prefer procoder for almost every job i hardly use cce or hc, which provide opv

              when i use those encoders it is because the avg bitrate is rather high and procoder is not necessary

              we may talk about 4500+ kbps


              concerning encoding times -i have listed opv encoding times for every idct using cce + hc here:


              the two pass times for this title were these:

              cce 270 2 passes - 123 min
              HC 016 - TR2 (profile "Best") - encoding - 213 min

              Procoder 2 - 237 min

              Comment

              • michi90
                Junior Member
                Junior Member
                • Jul 2005
                • 27

                #22
                @ UncasMS

                You wrote "shrink was used with max smoothness + aec".
                Hhhhhh ?
                But you have used deepanalysis + max smoothness (this is AEC) !
                Correct ?

                This is not fair !

                You have to use shrink (always !) with maximum sharpness (this is AEC) + deepanalysis.

                The names of the 4 different AEC settings are misleading.
                Instead of 'maximum sharpness' I would prefer 'maximum precision'.
                I've done many comparisons with the 4 different AEC settings.
                Even with long extreme action DVDs (for example 'Gladiator')
                'max sharp' produces the best quality.
                Though it should be the other way round, 'max smoothness' produces extreme blocking artifacts ironically even in action sequences !

                So, please use Shrink with 'maximum sharpness' and update your comparison !
                Last edited by michi90; 10 Apr 2006, 08:46 AM.

                Comment

                • HAMP
                  Junior Member
                  Junior Member
                  • Apr 2006
                  • 1

                  #23
                  I'm new to this site. I am a CloneDVD2 user and I was looking at ProCoder2 and it shows a big difference.
                  I was wondering if you could add something to the final test, if you could show the original shots also.

                  Comment

                  • rendez2k
                    Junior Member
                    Junior Member
                    • Jan 2006
                    • 11

                    #24
                    Nice test! I notice you didn't test AutoQMatEnc, which the next version of DVD-RB is apparently going to natively support... would have been nice to see how it stacked up along side these.

                    Comment

                    • UncasMS
                      Super Moderator
                      • Nov 2001
                      • 9047

                      #25
                      thanx for your feedback and sugestion

                      i may run another test with another title using different shrink settings, autoqm,...

                      Comment

                      • UncasMS
                        Super Moderator
                        • Nov 2001
                        • 9047

                        #26
                        here is another comparison:



                        and max sharpness is NOT the way to go ^_~
                        Last edited by UncasMS; 25 Apr 2006, 12:25 AM.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        😀
                        🥰
                        🤢
                        😎
                        😡
                        👍
                        👎