VCDQuality Forums - 2.35:1 to 1.85:1

Pages (2): [1] 2 »
Show all 28 posts from this thread on one page

VCDQuality Forums (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/index.php)
- Jargon, Encoding/Conversion and Burning (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=9)
-- 2.35:1 to 1.85:1 (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=52708)

Posted by ZootedLooter on 01-02-2005 06:24 AM:

2.35:1 to 1.85:1

next

what is the easiest way to convert to 16x9 from 2.35:1 releases....most of the time its from 480x480 letterbox releases but occasionally itd be dvd compliant mpgs at 720x480?(i think)...... im not worried about cropping the edges....i dont want to strech it into place....

i was playing around in tmpgenc for a bit...but all i did was strech the cropped 1.85 video back to 2.35...
what should i set source ar at in the advanced settings(i had 16x9 display)?and arrange method in the clip menu(i had center keep ar).....

id rather use canopus anyway...so if there is a template there i didnt see let me know also....

looter

__________________
zooted adj : 1. under influence of drugs: relaxed, excited, or euphoric from taking illegal drugs, especially marijuana ( slang ) 2. intoxicated: very intoxicated ( informal )
looter n. : someone who takes spoils or plunder (as in war) [syn: plunderer, pillager, spoiler, despoiler, raider, freebooter]

Posted by J Fresh on 01-02-2005 06:38 AM:

um.....what?

__________________

Posted by President on 01-02-2005 06:56 AM:

There is no specific template for it, and although it's not particularly difficult, it's a pretty bad idea to do it, as you would lose quite a bit of resolution.

You would essentially be zooming in on the 16:9 area of the 2.35 release, which already doesn't use the full 480 vertical resolution, and you would resize that up to fit the screen. If it's letterboxed within a 4:3 fullscreen, you are looking at around 270 lines of vertical resolution being resized up to 480.

It's not a bad idea if you are encoding for a lower resolution format like VCD, but not a good idea for DVD.

Do you have a good reason for wanting to do this, or...?

Posted by ZootedLooter on 01-02-2005 01:56 PM:

high again pres

4:3 would zoom into the full 480 and that might not be worth it...but 1.85 would still be letterboxed...just not as much....theyre for my kid on her 19" tv which sucks with 2.35.....so after we watch em on mine i want to zoom em cause she hates the "really skinny movies".....since its for a 19" i dont think too much quality loss would matter too much....especially for a kid

looter

Posted by J Fresh on 01-02-2005 05:12 PM:

just use tmpgenc and under..fuck im not opening it...some settings there a full screen option.

__________________

Posted by President on 01-02-2005 05:22 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by zootedlooter
high again pres

4:3 would zoom into the full 480 and that might not be worth it...but 1.85 would still be letterboxed...just not as much....theyre for my kid on her 19" tv which sucks with 2.35.....so after we watch em on mine i want to zoom em cause she hates the "really skinny movies".....since its for a 19" i dont think too much quality loss would matter too much....especially for a kid

looter

Let me just get this straight, do you want to make a 4:3 fullscreen or a 16:9 widescreen from the 2.35 source?

Posted by ZootedLooter on 01-02-2005 10:32 PM:

sorry if im confusing you guys

i want to make a 16x9 widescreen out of 2.35 source

Posted by President on 01-03-2005 12:33 AM:

If your source is anamorphic 720 x 480 @ 2.35:1, you need to crop out the centre of the image at a resolution of around 512 x 340, give or take a little depending on the source.

You need to resize the cropped area to fill the screen @ 720 x 480, or whichever target resolution you need, and voila, there's your anamorphic video.

If your source is non-anamorphic 720 x 480, you are looking at a crop resolution of around 512 x 256.

If your source is 480 x 480, the crop resolution would be around 342 x 256.

Posted by ZootedLooter on 01-03-2005 03:14 AM:

the crop sizes you gave me are definitly working....thanx.....

the problem i am having though is in tmpgenc..ive been playing with the source aspect ratio in advanced menu and the video arrange options in the clip menu..but i can only letterbox the sides of the finished video instead of zooming in on the center

ie: i wind up with black bars on top.. bottom and sides now...i want to zoom in and eliminate the side bars

why do i always seem to wind up in uncharted territory?
looter

Posted by President on 01-03-2005 04:07 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by zootedlooter
[B]the problem i am having though is in tmpgenc..ive been playing with the source aspect ratio in advanced menu and the video arrange options in the clip menu..but i can only letterbox the sides of the finished video instead of zooming in on the center

ie: i wind up with black bars on top.. bottom and sides now...i want to zoom in and eliminate the side bars

I don't get that. I just let the Source Aspect auto-detect, and then the crop/clip settings worked with the Video Arrange Method set to fullscreen. What's your Source Aspect set to?

Posted by ZootedLooter on 01-03-2005 03:31 PM:

thanx for all your time on this and other threads pres

step 1 accomplished
this time i used your settings....except i used the center(keep aspect ratio) in the video arrange tab.....worked better for me
thank you

next problem
looks like im gonna have to work with vbrs now...im getting jumpy scenes(dont know how else to put it)..... the movie im doing is darkness dvdrip 480x480 to give you some idea of what needs to be done......according to bitrate viewer its a vbr of 1825min - 3062max....i tried running one scene(boy on a swing) at 1 pass and 2 pass.....even going as high as 4000 and i still get negative results

is there anything i can do?
looter

Posted by SilentAssassin on 01-03-2005 04:59 PM:

Check the framerate of the original file and the framerate you are encoding to. TmpegEnc sucks big style at adjusting the FR and will always result in jerky motion.

Posted by ZootedLooter on 01-03-2005 07:19 PM:

thanx assasin....

framerates are the same....im wondering if i drop frames from ntsc 29.7fps to ntsc film 23.976 if it might help the problem..... not in the mood to fuck with it right now...kinda burnt

zootedsnoozer

:edit
normally i would be using canopus procoder....but this time i cant get a video preview from these mpgs.........strange...usually tmpgenc that cant open shit

Posted by President on 01-03-2005 08:39 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by zootedlooter
[B]thanx assasin....

framerates are the same....im wondering if i drop frames from ntsc 29.7fps to ntsc film 23.976 if it might help the problem.....

Your source is almost definitely not 29.97. If it's a movie, it will almost certainly be 23.976 with 3:2 pulldown enabled to make it look like 29.97. In which case you would need to remove the 3:2 pulldown/IVTC and encode at 23.97 with 3:2 Pulldown When Playback enabled.

... or encode it as 29.97 interlaced, not progressive, in TMPGenc. Both ways should work.

Unless your source is not a movie, but really is 29.97 interlaced. Encoding as such would solve the problem again.

It's extremely unlikely that it's 29.97 progressive, anyway.

... unless it's some crappy SVCD conversion, in which case you won't be able to do anything about it, but those are very rare these days.

Posted by ZootedLooter on 01-04-2005 01:16 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by President
... unless it's some crappy SVCD conversion

hahahahahahahahahahahahaha....thatd be my crappy conversion......i had already reencoded this from 25 fps to 29.97...thats why i was getting the stuttering during reencoding......

that said im taking a step back and i ll restart from the pal version....im guessing that i should reencode to 23.97 with 3:2 pulldown enabled...yes or no..also what about interlacing?

also it looks like im taking a step up from the little leagues to the minors.....if im going to continue this way i really should learn more about what im doing...does anyone have any good reference material to suggest?...websites or books are fine

zootedlearner

Posted by President on 01-04-2005 01:55 AM:

quote:
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha....thatd be my crappy conversion......i had already reencoded this from 25 fps to 29.97...thats why i was getting the stuttering during reencoding......

Yep, that would be why.

quote:
that said im taking a step back and i ll restart from the pal version....im guessing that i should reencode to 23.97 with 3:2 pulldown enabled...yes or no..also what about interlacing?

Yes, 23.976 is the correct framerate. 3:2 pulldown is a process that duplicates fields to make it look like 29.97 and be NTSC compliant.. It's just a flag that tells the player what to do with the video, so it can be added and removed for conversion purposes and isn't encoded into the actual video. So yes, it should be enabled. I use pulldown.exe to add and remove it from files. Only MPEG2 files can have 3:2 pulldown.

You should only use interlaced if your source is true 50 or 60hz interlaced video. As a rule of thumb, movies and TV shows are (almost) always 23.976, while stuff that's been rocorded on video or is live will be 29.97i. This would include the news, talkshows, sporting events, etc, etc.

quote:
also it looks like im taking a step up from the little leagues to the minors.....if im going to continue this way i really should learn more about what im doing...does anyone have any good reference material to suggest?...websites or books are fine

www.videohelp.com and doom9.org are quite handy, but it might be a bit tricky to trawl through all the stuff there and find what's relevant to you.

Posted by ZootedLooter on 01-04-2005 05:14 AM:

you may say im wrong for this but....

i ran the problematic scene through 4 different variables..and watched through zoomplayer...

23.97 pulldown enabled progressive
23.97 pulldown enabled interlaced
29.97 pulldown disabled progressive
29.97 pulldown disabled interlaced

the first 3 gave me interlacing lines as the kid swung across the screen which will later result in jerky video on my standalone

29.97 interlace was the only one that gave me a smooth picture..any idea why?

so heres another crappy svcd conversion from the looter
haha

as far as those sites go....theyre great for guides and forums but your right......its almost impossible to find anything relevent...i need a good reference guide that covers all the basics

thanx again for all the help.....i can almost garuntee youll be seeing me again soon....if you can think of anything i might of done wrong on this last shot keep the thread open

zootedlater

Posted by President on 01-04-2005 05:53 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by zootedlooter
[B]you may say im wrong for this but....

i ran the problematic scene through 4 different variables..and watched through zoomplayer...

23.97 pulldown enabled progressive
23.97 pulldown enabled interlaced
29.97 pulldown disabled progressive
29.97 pulldown disabled interlaced

the first 3 gave me interlacing lines as the kid swung across the screen which will later result in jerky video on my standalone

29.97 interlace was the only one that gave me a smooth picture..any idea why?

If 29.97 interlaced gave you the smoothest playback, chances are your original source was 25 interlaced. Converting this to 29.97 interlaced would introduce a little bit of blurring, but there should be no jerkiness.

What exactly is your source? Is it a movie? TV? Where did you get it? Don't need specifics on that one, it would just help to know if it's something you downloaded or something you recorded yourself.

Posted by ZootedLooter on 01-04-2005 06:03 AM:

dvdrip dl from the newsgroups

:edit
i just looked twciso released this as an ntsc svcd and a pal dvdr.....i got it as pal svcd....someone must have fucked with it

Posted by President on 01-04-2005 06:37 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by zootedlooter
dvdrip dl from the newsgroups

:edit
i just looked twciso released this as an ntsc svcd and a pal dvdr.....i got it as pal svcd....someone must have fucked with it

You haven't ticked 3:2 pulldown under the Advanced tab, have you? That's an extremely common mistake. It has to be the ticked under the Video tab where you set the frame rate, resolution, bit rate, etc.

It's very possible that the SVCD you have is a bad conversion, and there's nothing you can do about it. That would certainly be consistent with the fact that it looked best when converted to 29.97 interlaced.

Actually, tell me exactly what the movie is. I want to get this sorted out now. If necessarry, I will download a bit of it and have a look myself

PM me if you don't want to post it in the forum.

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:01 AM.

Pages (2): [1] 2 »
Show all 28 posts from this thread on one page