logo Sign In

The Cowclops Transfers (a.k.a. the PCM audio DVD's, Row47 set) Info and Feedback Thread (Released) — Page 14

Author
Time
Post link
CCE to compress the video, of course. Anything less would be rape. I used DVDMaestro/adobe premiere/paint shop pro in combination to make the menus, and nero to write it. Though I figured CCE is the answer you were looking for.
Author
Time
Post link
Any more piccies to hold us over until the disc appears?
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Cowclops
CCE to compress the video, of course. Anything less would be rape.


Agreed. What settings are you using? For my important stuff, I usually run a 3-pass VBR with the minimum being 2mbps, the max being 10 and average being 6.5.

I used to be very active on this forum. I’m not really anymore. Sometimes, people still want to get in touch with me about something, and that is great! If that describes you, please email me at [my username]ATgmailDOTcom.

Hi everybody. You’re all awesome. Keep up the good work.

Author
Time
Post link
For this, I think the average bitrate was about 3200 kbps or so. The average Q in bitrate viewer is less than 3, so really there are minimal compression artifacts. I believe I used an image priority setting of 40, as the noise can at times confuse the compressor so I went for a closer to balanced setting, leaning towards giving most of the bitrate to sharp areas. In cleaner signals, I would use a lower image priority setting so as to prevent mosquito noise. I had the max set to 8500 because with PCM audio, if it goes over that it might make some DVD players choke on the signal. All in all, it didn't matter much as the bitrate stays mostly between about 2000 and 5000 kbps.
Author
Time
Post link
CC: Not familiar with image priority setting, what does that do?
Also did you use 3 pass?

Dr. M

Author
Time
Post link
Cowclops, did the starfields get any better than last time, they are the thing giving me the $%!T$ at the moment...
Author
Time
Post link
Ok CowC, I have to ask, I know there are heated debates over this, but why did you choose CCE over Procoder? Many argue that CCE produces excessive mosquito noise.

I ask because I'm getting ready to do my own (non-SW) project and I was ready to go with CCE. That was before I did more research on it.

For image priority are you referring to Quantizer Characterisitics?
Also what version of CCE?

Dr. M

Author
Time
Post link
*** MAJOR UPDATE!! ***

I just received the new set yesterday and it is AWESOME. Definately better than the previous version in every respect. If anyone is interested in obtaining more info, please contact me by clicking my glasses icon. (please email me rather than PM as it is easier)
Author
Time
Post link
Woohoo! Can't wait! Looking forward to receiving and viewing the latest masterpiece Great job fellas, and thanks for the hard work you put into it!
Author
Time
Post link
Excellent!

TR47... you've got mail.


from me.

Author
Time
Post link
Well - all looks good and I should have the Cowclops V.2 set in a week or so - depends on how long TR47 takes to ship it to me

ONCE, they get here I will post that I have them, then I will up the first disc

RiK

“My skill are no longer as Mad as the once were” RiK

Author
Time
Post link
Nice job on the completion! Electronic high-fives all around. I scored the first TR47 set after stumbling upon this forum, and after reading through this thread I can't wait to get my hands on this updated version. Cowclops and TR47, your efforts are much appreciated! I have to say, the projects being discussed on these forums have done more to revitalize my love for Star Wars than anything officially released. Keep up the good work!
Author
Time
Post link
AMEN AMEN TO THAT BROTHA!! I have to say, I don't post often but I love what these guys are doing. I feel like I've dreamed about you folks a while back and now its a reality. True fans to the death!! I bought the previous set from tr47 and was very satisfied. I know that once I get my hands on v.2 I'll do backflips and run around in circles hitting my head with a hammer in disbelief. I really appreciates your efforts cowclops and tr47 and everyone else. much thanks!
DEATH TO VIDEODROME LONG LIVE THE NEW FLESH
Author
Time
Post link
Yes my order was in on Saturday. Looking forward to this set.
Author
Time
Post link
I noticed that Cowclops left some instruction on this page of the thread in terms of how to properly set your tvs brightness for his dvds. I tried his recommendation on my old set and it makes a HUGE difference. From what I have heard about the quality of the new set, it is probably a good idea for everyone to buy some adult diapers in preparation for there first viewing. I can't wait to get mine, I'm am going to stare at my mailbox until they arrive. I am already wearing my diaper just in case.

HARMY RULES

Author
Time
Post link
Cowclops, I know you don't have the original captures anymore, but from memory, did you experience much of a quality drop from your captures to the final images on DVD?
Or was your pre-processing enough that the difference was really minor?
Author
Time
Post link
As explained about 14 times in this thread already, all mpeg streams have a number associated with each gop sequence (a short sequence of frames whereby the compression method repeats). This number is called the Q level or quality level. It ranges from 1 to 100 where 1 is "basically identical to the original frame." Most professional movies end up with a Q level between 3 and 5, so it is relatively close to the original uncompressed source. My Star Wars set, even in single layer form, has a Q of about 2 on average. This number does not lie... it tells you exactly the amount of picture quality lost due to compression, and the amount lost due to compression is less than what most dual layer hollywood DVDs have to go through.

In other words, artifacts you see were there before I even compressed it, which means it was probably on the LD itself and not something I did in the process of finishing the video.
Author
Time
Post link
Correct me if I'm wrong...

But MPEG compression is much more than the Q level of the gop sequence. Just because it faithfully recreates each frame doesn't necessarily mean that each frame in itself isn't compressed.

A single JPEG frame compressed at small quality isn't going to look the same if you had initially compressed it at high quality.

What’s the internal temperature of a TaunTaun? Luke warm.

Author
Time
Post link
Just to add:

I understand that Laserdisc video is easier to compress due to its soft image and artifacts won't be as noticible as on a sharper image, but the fact remains that blocky digital artifacts are inherent to all MPEG compression. Whilst you think that a low compression isn't necessary, and you're probably right considering that DVD9s are too expensive at the moment, I just can't believe that the compression is practically unnoticible.

I own a copy of your first transfer so I am speaking from experience.

PS: I'm not pissing on your knowledge on the topic nor and I disrespecting your contribution to the Original Trilogy bootleg market. I am merely voicing my opinion. I'm not picking a fight. Repeat, I'm not picking a fight.

What’s the internal temperature of a TaunTaun? Luke warm.

Author
Time
Post link
But I already explained it. Multiple times. And again right now. THE Q LEVEL WILL NOT TELL YOU HOW GOOD THE PICTURE QUALITY IS. What it does tell you is how the overall compression artifacts compare to compression artifacts in hollywood DVDs. That is to say, the MPEG artifacts will be less than a standard hollywood DVD, but because the input signal is a tad cruddier in the first place, the output may have manifestations of garbage that are a direct result of the input source that are all but non existent on 100% clean film->dvd transfers.

The next person that asks me how the uncompressed video compares to the compressed video is going to get a bag of dogshit mailed to their house instead of the actual discs. The first time, it was a legitmate question. The third time, it was old but I still had the patience to explain it again in a slightly different way. By now, it is beating a horse that is dead and 70% rotted. Please stop forcing me to reword what I've already said a hundred times on this forum for anyone and everyone to read. If you didn't understand it by about the third time I explained it, chalk it up to something you just might never understand and instead use your eyes to judge whether you like it or not.
Author
Time
Post link
I know how MPEG2 works, I just wanted to confirm whether you thought it looked any different on this new version between the capture and the encode, as people have been asking over in my thread wether it is fair to compare capture screenshots to screenshots pulled from a finished DVD. In my opinion if done well, the difference is so minimal as to be negligible - I just wanted to make sure you agreed before I put up any other screenshots.
I'll take it as a no, I didn't see any difference. ;^)

Another question (I'll risk the bag of poo arriving in the post), are the screenshots TR47 posted recently accurate to what is on the disc (i.e. his editing to put them all together hasn't made them noticably worse or anything)

Author
Time
Post link
"But I already explained it. Multiple times. And again right now. THE Q LEVEL WILL NOT TELL YOU HOW GOOD THE PICTURE QUALITY IS."


OK... here are his multiple explanations. Taste the poo.



"My Star Wars set, even in single layer form, has a Q of about 2 on average. This number does not lie... it tells you exactly the amount of picture quality lost due to compression, and the amount lost due to compression is less than what most dual layer hollywood DVDs have to go through."

"I believe you missed what I said about bitrate viewer. Every mpeg encoded video, be it mpeg1 or mpeg2, has a number associated with each small sequence of frames. This number is called the "Q level" and describes, basically, the difference in quality between the source frame and the mpeg2 compressed frame. It ranges from 1 to 100 with 1 being best and 100 being worst. There is nothing to be "gained" by forcing the bitrate higher because there is nothing LOST at the bitrate I used for the single layer discs (about 3500kbps)."

"The Q Level (Which isn't an opinion of quality but an absolute statement of deviation from the source frame) is less than 3 in both versions. Most Hollywood DVDs aren't even compressed this perfectly (but thats because they have detail that makes it harder to compress anyway).

The dual layer version exists but as I've stressed at least 5 times before and can't believe i'm saying it a 6th time... THE COMPRESSION IS NOT THE ISSUE."

"In this case, to claim DVD9 is somehow "better" you'd have to assume that DVD5 wasn't "good enough." Since the source is laserdisc and not film, it means its not as sharp. Since its not as sharp as film, its easier to compress. And since its easier to compress, it doesn't need DVD9. Bitrate viewer agrees."

"B) For fucks sake raised to the 20th power, the video fits JUST FINE on a single layer disc with menus and everything. No we will not be offering it on dual layer, except I made a dual layer version anyway to compare the Q levels of each disc and show how unnecessary it is. It goes like this:

1. Soft video is easy to compress
2. Laserdiscs are softer than DVD
3. Thus laserdisc video is easier to compress than "usual" dvd material.
4. Thus shut the hell up. QED. "

"For this, I think the average bitrate was about 3200 kbps or so. The average Q in bitrate viewer is less than 3, so really there are minimal compression artifacts. I believe I used an image priority setting of 40, as the noise can at times confuse the compressor so I went for a closer to balanced setting, leaning towards giving most of the bitrate to sharp areas. In cleaner signals, I would use a lower image priority setting so as to prevent mosquito noise. I had the max set to 8500 because with PCM audio, if it goes over that it might make some DVD players choke on the signal. All in all, it didn't matter much as the bitrate stays mostly between about 2000 and 5000 kbps."

"The average bitrate I'm using on the new set (which is actually a little less than I used on the old set because I'm making room for menus) still produces a maximum Q level (as reported by bitrateviewer) of LESS THAN 5, and an average of less than 3. While this doesn't imply that the final video quality is perfect, it DOES imply that the quality lost due to compression is extremely minimal."

What’s the internal temperature of a TaunTaun? Luke warm.

Author
Time
Post link
Ahh there we go, my answer to my first question was in that last bit - I'll be binning any smelly packages I get in the post then...

Still like to risk an answer to question two though.
Author
Time
Post link
"In other words, artifacts you see were there before I even compressed it, which means it was probably on the LD itself and not something I did in the process of finishing the video."

What was your method of capture?

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Post link
To be honest, the caps I posted are not good quality.. they're just for preview purposes, not really for serious comparisons. That greenish tinge in the first shot is actually not present in that scene, it's probably some result of jpg compression.