Seriously, does anyone care about quality anymore?

[outlawed]

Beware several of my answers are based off the theme of video quality which I am assuming based on your thread title.

What the fuck happened to only submitting a high quality MPEG2 or loss-less encode to a contest?

That is more of an editor's decision. If you want to call out editors for declining video quality because they are submitting divx/xvid/etc and have not learned to properly encode videos then feel free to make a case for that.

Pick any random contest thread in the contest forum and you'll see xvid, h264 and, thanks for giving me a heart attack, wmv

None of those formats or MPEG-2 inherently mean anything about the relative encoding quality of a video. If someone is compiling a NTSC or PAL DVD for contest playback then they are going to convert every entry sent to them anyway. So file formatting should be more about assistance in conversion than anything else. Those more versed in DVD production will understand reasons why we don't just put some exact formatting reqs out there for MPEG-2 and say send me this and I'll master it without alterations right into the DVD. We are now in the age where NTSC and PAL are true dinosaurs but we still may need to master to those formats due to limitations and requirements of venue and many contests rules could be considered shaped by that.

Some contests have very broad requirements as they may view themselves as able to get more entries or being more open to new creators. This is a valid viewpoint but some would disagree as new creators do have more opportunities for exposure on venues older creators did not have (myriad number of streaming sites, blogs, and of course more contests than ever before both online and at-con). I would say after about 1 year of ACen AMV tech I quite worrying about who we might exclude through formatting reqs and decided to focus more on better explanations and clearer general rules. I feel in the long run this has greatly helped us and I have seen improvements in the tech ability of several regular submitters. I can't say it will work for everyone but that's my perspective.

So in my opinion formatting reqs solve a lot of problems and should be the first step any good contest tech makes. If you know you need to output to DVD then getting the right frame rate and frame size from contests is really key in improving and making the transition easy. Limiting the submission file formats also cuts down on a lot of overhead in file management and conversion. I do believe that putting the onus on entrants for some level of formatting is brushed aside by too many large contests although this has been greatly changing in recent years. Let's keep in mind at one time all the good editors sent MPEG-2 because they knew that was the best high quality they could put out but the contest rules for many places just basically said try to send us X and if we can't deal with Y we will let you know. It's conceited but I have always hoped that I can be considered somewhat of a trendsetter in terms of telling entrants you can't send us X,Y,Z I only want A & B. I cannot claim I influenced other contests as many of us are insular but if nothing else I prepared some entrants for this practice =p

h264 has it's place. it's a distribution codec and it should only be used as such.

Most conventions are asking for distribution codec/files not editing codecs. MPEG-2 is a distribution format (personally I don't consider MPEG-2 100% I-frame files a real editing format). If you mean to say internet distribution format you are WRONG because H.264 can go well beyond that. Personally I WANT H.264 as long as it's encapsulated in an MPEG-4 file container and I think that should become the "new gold standard" for AMV contest submission.

In an AMV contest where bit rate and disk space shouldn't be a problem, uncompressed or lossless (huffyuv/lagarith) should be the only things allowed

Run a contest and then see what you think about this. For ACen I make intermediate huffyuv from all entries I get and work from those to make any needed alternate versions of the contest (our primary AMV room playback method is using the exact files entrants send us ...mind you I have a very rigid and thorough testing process in place). There is no perfect formula though. Take MPEG-2 files as an example. A simple AVS script to dump of your own ACen macross submission using FFMPEGSOURCE resulted in a file that had A/V synch waaaay off. Kitsuner's trailer entry and maybe 4 other files that had the same issue and I had to use an alternate method to convert your videos to intermediate Huffyuv. The only thing in common I could find between a couple of them is you may have used the same exact build of TMPGEnc. This is one of the reasons I try to work with only a couple formats now. It makes the conversion process simpler and I am more aware of possible problems I can run into.

I don't want to deal with editors' huffyuv avi files. Many of the reasons are similar to why many contests stopped taking M-JPEG back in the day. Maybe the entrant used some broken version or hack of the driver or exported to a broken avi container with god knows what program. I also don't want to deal with people trying to upload 2+ gig files anymore after they were told huffyuv mail only in the past and that did not work. Simply put Huffyuv avi is extra overhead for me and in terms of video quality that is the only thing it might improve on. Based on comments to me and lack of complaints over the last 2 years of ACen contests I can safely say people are satisfied with the video quality and the conversion process is not the limiting factor.

While MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 are platform independent there are more restrictive than AVI or MKV so there is more of a level of control in place. MOV is too restrictive for me and obviously not platform independent. Apple's stuff works great but that's only when you are truly immersed 100% in Apple and that's just not going to work for a contest which is why even if a contest accepts it they'll usually say "we'll try to work with it if we have to but please send us something else if you can."

H.264 & AAC inside MPEG-4 (my new standard) is infinitely superior to MPEG-2 & MP2 (the old standard).

[outlawed]

A simple AVS script to dump of your own ACen macross submission using MPEG2SOURCE resulted in a file that had A/V synch waaaay off. Kitsuner's trailer entry and maybe 4 other files I was usiing FFMPEGSOURCE on had the same issue and I had to use an alternate method to convert your videos to intermediate Huffyuv. The only thing in common I could find between a couple of the MPEG-2 ones is you may have used the same exact build of TMPGEnc.

FIXT. WTB edit on all forums =p

[Zarxrax]

What the fuck happened to only submitting a high quality MPEG2 or loss-less encode to a contest? Pick any random contest thread in the contest forum and you'll see xvid, h264 and, thanks for giving me a heart attack, wmv

Maybe because all 3 of those formats are better than MPEG2. Because I care about quality, I'd rather use a standard that's not 15 years old.
And hell, there's still not any any halfway decent, easy-to-use encoder for MPEG2. I don't enjoy making crappy mpeg2 encodes for some con, filled with visible artifacts, and then finding out I set the bitrate too high or something and it doesn't play right on their ancient hardware.

[Knowname]

and any corporate ($$$) sponsored event will be looking for quantity. C'mon! They gotta make their money.

[Kristyrat]

If good editors didn't have some sort of phobia of submitting to the dozens of small cons that run every year instead of just the big named ones, maybe the standards could be raised.

I don't think it's a phobia at all, just people not wanting to troll those small conventions. I know for me personally, when I was starting out, I hated seeing the "good editor" videos in the local contests, because it meant that nobody else really had a chance, it devalued the contest, and it basically just meant you were going there to see some of the "better videos" on a bigger screen. If a contest -requests- entries from those editors, than it's a different thing, but I personally hate the idea of sending any of my videos to small cons, particularly ones that I'm not attending.

More on topic, I do believe it's a way to get more entries, plain and simple. I'm sure most coordinators would rather have 500 entries, pick out the terribad ones and make a fairly solid showing, than have 20 and be forced to show the mediocre ones in order to fill up a time block.

Whether or not this is actually happening/the case, I haven't been to enough cons lately to really know.

[Pwolf]

So, quality aside, the general consensus is that the AMV coordinators don't care about the format? Fine, i'll deal with that. Seems wacky to me but if it works for you guys, so be it

[ngsilver]

I think Outlawed and Bashar pretty much said everything I would have said coming from a coordinator's point of view.

As an entrant I try to send in the highest quality file I can to a contest, because I care about the final viewing quality. However that format changes based on the contest. It all depends on what the contest accepts and how the contest will be played. If a contest will take x.264 and will not convert it to any other format for playback, I would rather send in that format because when played back it will look better then the standard mpeg2 encoding I do which often times gets sent back because the bitrate is too high and the coordinator can't play it (this has happened to me multiple times sending to AWA.) That's all because as an entrant I consider the final playback quality over anything else. However, I also as a coordinator know that sending in different formats can create more work for the coordinator and sometimes bring in errors that were not present in my encode, so I try to send in the best format I can to make the final viewing the best. If a coordinator is going to re-encode everything onto a DVD I'll just send a lossless codec or a DVD formatted mpeg2 (depending on if I can afford to mail the video or have the time to do so.)

As a coordinator for a number of smaller cons I have to deal with trying to keep final quality up, streamlining the conversion process, and make sure that there are enough entries to justify my time slot in main events. If I limit what formats I can accept (and I already get tons of complaints about the formats I already don't accept because they are not easy to play with) and I don't get enough entries to fill the time slot I'm given it looks bad on my part, and can also cost the main event's showing. My accepted formats are in place mainly to allow new editors (mainly those who use WMM and can't be bothered to figure out how to encode) the chance to submit their works while at the same time making sure I can accept and convert the entry to a format acceptable for final playback. I'll never again accept a WMV file after my first year working youmacon and had to convert a WMV entry that had a variable framerate into mpeg2 so my h+ could play the video back. The same can be said for other formats I now will not accept. I also have to deal with the possibility of alienating the editors who already submit entries to the contests I run if I were to tighten up my requirements to accept only certain 'high quality' submission formats. But hey, if more editors who use 'high quality' encodes would submit to these smaller cons that I coordinate for I wouldn't have to worry so much about not having enough entries, and as always, the lowest quality videos tend to get cut first.

And personally, I'd much rather deal with an x.264 file then some of these mpeg2 encodes I've gotten from editors. The final display quality his higher and I also don't have to deal with a mpeg2 that auto skips sections because it was encoded wrong. Sure, my h+ could play said mpeg2 fine, but then I have to stick to an old and archaic playback environment, which I long sense moved away from.

In the end I'm not sure why it matters what codec or format a contest accepts. If quality is the final issue, and the final playback quality is the true aim why not embrace newer formats that can do it better then older ones? After all, if final viewing quality is all that matters and there are two videos up on the chopping block, an h.264 that looks close to blu-ray quality and an mpeg2 that looks like shit which would you cut? I'd cut the mpeg2, but I'd figure that answer is obvious.

[Phantasmagoriat]

It seems to me that as long as it can be played back properly, and the quality doesn't suck, everything else is moot.

But this calls into question how it is being done from con to con. For instance, how are most coordinators converting h264/AAC. Only recently has it been popping up at conventions everywhere, so I would consider it relatively new for cons--- but is it being converted the same way? Directshowsource() ?

[outlawed]

So, quality aside, the general consensus is that the AMV coordinators don't care about the format?

Well you know I care. As for other folks who run contests . give them some time maybe they'll get bored and explain their reasoning =p

[Megamom]

MPEG2 is obsolete!

Viva WMV9