Re: Mpeg files to DVD -- pixelated?

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by booser, Oct 6, 2004.

  1. booser

    booser Guest

    "J Belly" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi all:
    >
    > Newbie here. I converted multiple mpeg files to play on my DVD
    > player by using TMPGEnc Author. Process worked fine (even though I
    > ignored a "Video GOP is too long" message), but when I tested the
    > result on PowerDVD, I saw that the video ended up being too pixelated
    > (lots of "small squares" over the pictures). Is there any way (maybe
    > another software?) to improve the quality?
    >
    > Don't know if it matters, but here are the tech specs that Author
    > showed after I added one of the files:
    >
    > MPEG-1, 352x240, 29.97 fps (4:3) NTSC
    > MPEG-1 Audio Layer-2, 48000 Hz Stereo, 128 kbps (Monolingual)


    Use a higher resolution and a higher bitrate. Source should be atleast
    720x480 before conversion and you should not scale the image down (the
    encoder should be smart enough to throw out information you don't need and
    scaling simply compresses the pixels). For a DVD, 6000 kbps 2 hour film
    will about fill out the entire space.
     
    booser, Oct 6, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. booser

    Bill in Co. Guest

    booser wrote:
    > "J Belly" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Hi all:
    >>
    >> Newbie here. I converted multiple mpeg files to play on my DVD
    >> player by using TMPGEnc Author. Process worked fine (even though I
    >> ignored a "Video GOP is too long" message), but when I tested the
    >> result on PowerDVD, I saw that the video ended up being too pixelated
    >> (lots of "small squares" over the pictures). Is there any way (maybe
    >> another software?) to improve the quality?
    >>
    >> Don't know if it matters, but here are the tech specs that Author
    >> showed after I added one of the files:
    >>
    >> MPEG-1, 352x240, 29.97 fps (4:3) NTSC
    >> MPEG-1 Audio Layer-2, 48000 Hz Stereo, 128 kbps (Monolingual)

    >
    > Use a higher resolution and a higher bitrate. Source should be atleast
    > 720x480 before conversion and you should not scale the image down (the
    > encoder should be smart enough to throw out information you don't need and
    > scaling simply compresses the pixels). For a DVD, 6000 kbps 2 hour film
    > will about fill out the entire space.


    I think it's more like 4000 kbps.
     
    Bill in Co., Oct 6, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. booser

    booser Guest

    "Bill in Co." <> wrote in message
    news:AnI8d.3846$...
    > booser wrote:
    > > "J Belly" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > >> Hi all:
    > >>
    > >> Newbie here. I converted multiple mpeg files to play on my DVD
    > >> player by using TMPGEnc Author. Process worked fine (even though I
    > >> ignored a "Video GOP is too long" message), but when I tested the
    > >> result on PowerDVD, I saw that the video ended up being too pixelated
    > >> (lots of "small squares" over the pictures). Is there any way (maybe
    > >> another software?) to improve the quality?
    > >>
    > >> Don't know if it matters, but here are the tech specs that Author
    > >> showed after I added one of the files:
    > >>
    > >> MPEG-1, 352x240, 29.97 fps (4:3) NTSC
    > >> MPEG-1 Audio Layer-2, 48000 Hz Stereo, 128 kbps (Monolingual)

    > >
    > > Use a higher resolution and a higher bitrate. Source should be atleast
    > > 720x480 before conversion and you should not scale the image down (the
    > > encoder should be smart enough to throw out information you don't need

    and
    > > scaling simply compresses the pixels). For a DVD, 6000 kbps 2 hour film
    > > will about fill out the entire space.

    >
    > I think it's more like 4000 kbps.


    (4700000000 bytes (approximate) / (120 minutes * 60 seconds per
    minute))/1024 bytes per kilobytes * 8 bits per bytes = 5099.8

    So ha. 5099.8 (ignoring audio) is closer to 6000 than to 4000.
     
    booser, Oct 7, 2004
    #3
  4. booser

    Robin Banks Guest

    On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 01:25:21 GMT, "booser" <> wrote:

    > So ha. 5099.8 (ignoring audio) is closer to 6000 than to 4000.


    I guess that's fine if your figuring for silent movies then. <laugh>

    Add in the audio (which you have to do in order to be reasonable)... bet it
    gets closer to 4000 than 6000.


    ~~R.Banks
     
    Robin Banks, Oct 7, 2004
    #4
  5. booser

    Bill in Co. Guest

    booser wrote:
    > "Bill in Co." <> wrote in message
    > news:AnI8d.3846$...
    >> booser wrote:
    >>> "J Belly" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Hi all:
    >>>>
    >>>> Newbie here. I converted multiple mpeg files to play on my DVD
    >>>> player by using TMPGEnc Author. Process worked fine (even though I
    >>>> ignored a "Video GOP is too long" message), but when I tested the
    >>>> result on PowerDVD, I saw that the video ended up being too pixelated
    >>>> (lots of "small squares" over the pictures). Is there any way (maybe
    >>>> another software?) to improve the quality?
    >>>>
    >>>> Don't know if it matters, but here are the tech specs that Author
    >>>> showed after I added one of the files:
    >>>>
    >>>> MPEG-1, 352x240, 29.97 fps (4:3) NTSC
    >>>> MPEG-1 Audio Layer-2, 48000 Hz Stereo, 128 kbps (Monolingual)
    >>>
    >>> Use a higher resolution and a higher bitrate. Source should be atleast
    >>> 720x480 before conversion and you should not scale the image down (the
    >>> encoder should be smart enough to throw out information you don't need

    and
    >>> scaling simply compresses the pixels). For a DVD, 6000 kbps 2 hour film
    >>> will about fill out the entire space.

    >>
    >> I think it's more like 4000 kbps.

    >
    > (4700000000 bytes (approximate) / (120 minutes * 60 seconds per
    > minute))/1024 bytes per kilobytes * 8 bits per bytes = 5099.8
    >
    > So ha. 5099.8 (ignoring audio) is closer to 6000 than to 4000.


    Well let's see, that 5099 is about 5100, less audio. Throw in the audio,
    and it is LESS than 5000! (Closer to 4000 than 6000). So ha. You
    lose!
     
    Bill in Co., Oct 7, 2004
    #5
  6. booser

    Bill in Co. Guest

    Robin Banks wrote:
    > On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 01:25:21 GMT, "booser" <>

    wrote:
    >
    >> So ha. 5099.8 (ignoring audio) is closer to 6000 than to 4000.

    >
    > I guess that's fine if your figuring for silent movies then. <laugh>
    >
    > Add in the audio (which you have to do in order to be reasonable)... bet

    it
    > gets closer to 4000 than 6000.
    >
    >
    > ~~R.Banks


    Yup. And 5099 is essentially 5100 anyway. The net result is closer to
    4000 than 6000.
     
    Bill in Co., Oct 7, 2004
    #6
  7. booser

    booser Guest

    "Bill in Co." <> wrote in message
    news:gg19d.7956$...
    > booser wrote:
    > > "Bill in Co." <> wrote in message
    > > news:AnI8d.3846$...
    > >> booser wrote:
    > >>> "J Belly" <> wrote in message
    > >>> news:...
    > >>>> Hi all:
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Newbie here. I converted multiple mpeg files to play on my DVD
    > >>>> player by using TMPGEnc Author. Process worked fine (even though I
    > >>>> ignored a "Video GOP is too long" message), but when I tested the
    > >>>> result on PowerDVD, I saw that the video ended up being too pixelated
    > >>>> (lots of "small squares" over the pictures). Is there any way (maybe
    > >>>> another software?) to improve the quality?
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Don't know if it matters, but here are the tech specs that Author
    > >>>> showed after I added one of the files:
    > >>>>
    > >>>> MPEG-1, 352x240, 29.97 fps (4:3) NTSC
    > >>>> MPEG-1 Audio Layer-2, 48000 Hz Stereo, 128 kbps (Monolingual)
    > >>>
    > >>> Use a higher resolution and a higher bitrate. Source should be

    atleast
    > >>> 720x480 before conversion and you should not scale the image down (the
    > >>> encoder should be smart enough to throw out information you don't need

    > and
    > >>> scaling simply compresses the pixels). For a DVD, 6000 kbps 2 hour

    film
    > >>> will about fill out the entire space.
    > >>
    > >> I think it's more like 4000 kbps.

    > >
    > > (4700000000 bytes (approximate) / (120 minutes * 60 seconds per
    > > minute))/1024 bytes per kilobytes * 8 bits per bytes = 5099.8
    > >
    > > So ha. 5099.8 (ignoring audio) is closer to 6000 than to 4000.

    >
    > Well let's see, that 5099 is about 5100, less audio. Throw in the audio,
    > and it is LESS than 5000! (Closer to 4000 than 6000). So ha. You
    > lose!


    Use the "real" value of 4.7 gigabytes (5046586572.8 bytes or
    4.7*1024*1048576) and it comes to 5475.8 kbps. Use 384 kbps as the audio
    and I'm still closer. Ha again.
     
    booser, Oct 7, 2004
    #7
  8. booser

    Bill in Co. Guest

    booser wrote:
    > "Bill in Co." <> wrote in message
    > news:gg19d.7956$...
    >> booser wrote:
    >>> "Bill in Co." <> wrote in message
    >>> news:AnI8d.3846$...
    >>>> booser wrote:
    >>>>> "J Belly" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>> Hi all:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Newbie here. I converted multiple mpeg files to play on my DVD
    >>>>>> player by using TMPGEnc Author. Process worked fine (even though I
    >>>>>> ignored a "Video GOP is too long" message), but when I tested the
    >>>>>> result on PowerDVD, I saw that the video ended up being too pixelated
    >>>>>> (lots of "small squares" over the pictures). Is there any way (maybe
    >>>>>> another software?) to improve the quality?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Don't know if it matters, but here are the tech specs that Author
    >>>>>> showed after I added one of the files:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> MPEG-1, 352x240, 29.97 fps (4:3) NTSC
    >>>>>> MPEG-1 Audio Layer-2, 48000 Hz Stereo, 128 kbps (Monolingual)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Use a higher resolution and a higher bitrate. Source should be

    atleast
    >>>>> 720x480 before conversion and you should not scale the image down (the
    >>>>> encoder should be smart enough to throw out information you don't need

    and
    >>>>> scaling simply compresses the pixels). For a DVD, 6000 kbps 2 hour

    film
    >>>>> will about fill out the entire space.
    >>>>
    >>>> I think it's more like 4000 kbps.
    >>>
    >>> (4700000000 bytes (approximate) / (120 minutes * 60 seconds per
    >>> minute))/1024 bytes per kilobytes * 8 bits per bytes = 5099.8
    >>>
    >>> So ha. 5099.8 (ignoring audio) is closer to 6000 than to 4000.

    >>
    >> Well let's see, that 5099 is about 5100, less audio. Throw in the

    audio,
    >> and it is LESS than 5000! (Closer to 4000 than 6000). So ha. You
    >> lose!

    >
    > Use the "real" value of 4.7 gigabytes (5046586572.8 bytes or
    > 4.7*1024*1048576) and it comes to 5475.8 kbps. Use 384 kbps as the audio
    > and I'm still closer. Ha again.


    Nope. The real byte value of the DVD capacity is about 4.3 GB, NOT 4.7
    GB. Your math was right the first time.
     
    Bill in Co., Oct 7, 2004
    #8
  9. booser

    booser Guest

    "Bill in Co." <> wrote in message
    news:FV39d.8208$...
    > booser wrote:
    > > "Bill in Co." <> wrote in message
    > > news:gg19d.7956$...
    > >> booser wrote:
    > >>> "Bill in Co." <> wrote in message
    > >>> news:AnI8d.3846$...
    > >>>> booser wrote:
    > >>>>> "J Belly" <> wrote in message
    > >>>>> news:...
    > >>>>>> Hi all:
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> Newbie here. I converted multiple mpeg files to play on my DVD
    > >>>>>> player by using TMPGEnc Author. Process worked fine (even though I
    > >>>>>> ignored a "Video GOP is too long" message), but when I tested the
    > >>>>>> result on PowerDVD, I saw that the video ended up being too

    pixelated
    > >>>>>> (lots of "small squares" over the pictures). Is there any way

    (maybe
    > >>>>>> another software?) to improve the quality?
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> Don't know if it matters, but here are the tech specs that Author
    > >>>>>> showed after I added one of the files:
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> MPEG-1, 352x240, 29.97 fps (4:3) NTSC
    > >>>>>> MPEG-1 Audio Layer-2, 48000 Hz Stereo, 128 kbps (Monolingual)
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>> Use a higher resolution and a higher bitrate. Source should be

    > atleast
    > >>>>> 720x480 before conversion and you should not scale the image down

    (the
    > >>>>> encoder should be smart enough to throw out information you don't

    need
    > and
    > >>>>> scaling simply compresses the pixels). For a DVD, 6000 kbps 2 hour

    > film
    > >>>>> will about fill out the entire space.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> I think it's more like 4000 kbps.
    > >>>
    > >>> (4700000000 bytes (approximate) / (120 minutes * 60 seconds per
    > >>> minute))/1024 bytes per kilobytes * 8 bits per bytes = 5099.8
    > >>>
    > >>> So ha. 5099.8 (ignoring audio) is closer to 6000 than to 4000.
    > >>
    > >> Well let's see, that 5099 is about 5100, less audio. Throw in the

    > audio,
    > >> and it is LESS than 5000! (Closer to 4000 than 6000). So ha.

    You
    > >> lose!

    > >
    > > Use the "real" value of 4.7 gigabytes (5046586572.8 bytes or
    > > 4.7*1024*1048576) and it comes to 5475.8 kbps. Use 384 kbps as the

    audio
    > > and I'm still closer. Ha again.

    >
    > Nope. The real byte value of the DVD capacity is about 4.3 GB, NOT 4.7
    > GB. Your math was right the first time.


    The real value they claim, not the real value that it should be. Should be
    some type of digital accuracy law where you can only mark devices and dvds
    by the capacity based on 1024 instead of 1000.
     
    booser, Oct 7, 2004
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. J Belly

    Mpeg files to DVD -- pixelated?

    J Belly, Oct 4, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    512
    Nicholas Andrade
    Oct 5, 2004
  2. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    5,251
  3. bobo
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    5,199
    cindylili
    Jun 24, 2009
  4. bobo
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,217
  5. zijuan
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,034
    zijuan
    Jul 26, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page