cheap MPEG-2 encoders

madmallard · Post by **madmallard** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 10:07 pm

hey quu. . .lets take pictures of his bedroom and your house and see whos is more "Lain-like."

iserlohn · Post by **iserlohn** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 10:14 pm

Ummm....I recall a certain mac-based card that cost less than $3G and could kick the ass of most MPEG-2 boards, so do your research properly. MPEG-2 is nice because you can get good quality at better sizes than DV, but if you want to use bitrates at the level you're implying (the 45Mbit level), it may be worth going with DV instead.

Also, I agree with the poster above. MPEG-2 is *not* an editing format. It's for broadcasting, DVD, etc. Most codecs with an IPB frame structure are that way. Almost all true highend editing is done either uncompressed or in DV and then converted to MPEG-2 at the last step. Want proof? Find me a digital video system (tape based) that uses MPEG-2. You won't. DV, D2, D9, etc. are all their own digital setup. None of them are MPEG-2 based.

So what is my advice to you? Get a mac system with some big fast SCSI drives and have Nightowl point you to the capture board of love.

madmallard · Post by **madmallard** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 10:16 pm

oh yeah, you said ripping takes too much time?, the Targa3k is not only uncompressed, but also has hardware compression of DV and Mpeg-2.

you could edit in uncompressed or in mpeg-2 and the card wouldn't care. It would be realtime either way. no rendering for the cpu. just strip the disk, and capture from the vcr. use both at once.

but you said you wanted to use virtual dub, so Quu's original advice stands as your best bet.

Nightowl · Post by **Nightowl** » Fri Feb 07, 2003 12:09 am

I can't answer the question, but I feel I have to say something since my name was mentioned : ) Besides, one of the Mac editing brethren needs to respond.

And please keep in mind: This is not meant to offend anyone. It's more like a venting of extreme anger I've kept pent up for awhile - i.e. me being tired of being told I don't know shit about hardware when I've been doing this for quite awhile.

That, and I'm pretentious.

The term "lossless compression" is, to me, one of the funniest things I've heard in awhile. It's one of those trendy video terms that means absolute bunk in the real world. If you don't find it amusing, just think about it for a few minutes. This is why, if you want lossless video, you go with an uncompressed card. If you can't work in uncompressed video, you can't work in lossless. These are the simple facts of broadcast quality video - no matter how many stats a company releases, they are just that - stats. We can all use our eyes. If the image quality doesn't look good, it simply doesn't look good. Professionals don't edit in MPEG-2 because it's still quite unstable, and hasn't achieved the quality of uncompressed video.

Most of the newer companies that make video cards these days don't seem to know the basic fundamentals of video. They have their little spec charts and sheets explaining why their card is great and lossless compression and all that crap. Just keep this in mind - most of these cards are prosumer. They'll get the job done. They're fine for AMV creators because we aren't actually going to be broadcasting any of this stuff. Sad but true, I know. Yes, every once in awhile someone gets it screened in Holland or something, but it's very rare.

Why am I blabbing on about all this? Because every ten seconds some kid is talking to me about how his/her card is so much better than mine because he/she was told it is. There are maybe ten people on this forum who truly know their shit about video and could work in it professionally. I get really tired of being mocked due to specs which don't make a damn bit of difference in the first place.

Of course, we all get what we can afford. So here's my advice: DV and MPEG-2 are both very good for low-level, prosumer output. DV is good for editing simply because it's readily available and cheap as dirt. But a good analog capture card can still get a lot better quality. I said GOOD analog capture. That's SDI, kids. If you're cutting in MPEG-2 or DV and you try to start something with someone because they have an uncompressed SDI system, walk away. They'll get all pissy because you have no idea what you're talking about. You hear me?

Oh, but there was a topic...

MPEG-2 is a standard - it's pretty standard for final compression out to lower forms of media for fast, cheap distribution - not an editing format. I rather dislike MPEG-2, if you all couldn't tell.

The Targa3000 is good and all... but not great. In fact, it's rather pricey for waht it can do. There are much better cards out there - but for AMV editing, it doesn't really matter, because it's totally unnecessary.

It's true that if all you're copying from are DVDs then the best quality of compression you'll be getting is MPEG-2 anyway. What's good about analog capture is it can filter out most of the crap and give your project a much nicer picture. If you have component in with a SCSI RAID on a high end capture card, it could make dogs playing poker look like the Mona Lisa, as the saying goes.

Pat originally had a question... Pat, since you're outputting in MPEG-2 for convention presentation and you already have that equipment, why do you want something new? Are you going for something different?

See? I DID address the original post! It took like nine paragraphs, but I did it! This is why I don't post much. After I post this drivvle I'll get one of three responses (or lack thereof): I'll be ignored, I'll be flamed, or I'll be laughed at.

Screw it, I'm tired of typing.

-N

hackerzc · Post by **hackerzc** » Fri Feb 07, 2003 12:49 am

sixstop wrote:oh yeah, you said ripping takes too much time?, the Targa3k is not only uncompressed, but also has hardware compression of DV and Mpeg-2.

you could edit in uncompressed or in mpeg-2 and the card wouldn't care. It would be realtime either way. no rendering for the cpu. just strip the disk, and capture from the vcr. use both at once.

but you said you wanted to use virtual dub, so Quu's original advice stands as your best bet.

When did this become a topic about helping me? I've just been saying what I like, use, and want.

As for the Targa 3K, I think I may have gone temporarily insane at the thought of being about to use such technological goodness. I could by a cat girl slave for $5K!!! Just keep her high on pocky and she won't mind =^)

hackerzc · Post by **hackerzc** » Fri Feb 07, 2003 12:50 am

oh the typos, they hurt so much!

madmallard · Post by **madmallard** » Fri Feb 07, 2003 1:27 am

nightowl-- quu's always looking for simpler, smaller, and cheaper, you know that. ;p

and i hope you didn't include me in that "best video card" whiners club. I'm kinda past that bells and whistles phase, and i'm more concerned with reaching the end without tearing out my hair doing it.

Org Profile · Post by **Vlad G Pohnert** » Fri Feb 07, 2003 2:08 am

Yep, the world is a big place and the word "Quality" can mean so much in so many different places. I think in gemeral, I have to somewhat agree that I just can't understand why you need a uncompressed editing card if it's for a hobby like AMVs or for small consumer stuff..

Now in terms of broadcast quality, that's a whole can of worms and I guess it also depends where and for who your working for. I know of a few in places like South America who use pro-consumer cards to make television commercials.

My point is, as I think was pointed out, get what you need and what works for you and don't get so tied down in this codex, compression mumbo jumbo!

Vlad

Nightowl · Post by **Nightowl** » Fri Feb 07, 2003 3:19 am

sixstop - Heh, you're right, I should've remembered the simpler, smaller, and cheaper thing - I figured I had to relate my post to the thread in some way : ) And no, I was pretty much generalizing the "best video card" whiners club - I had no intention of including you in that circle - had absolutely nothing to do with you. I was mostly venting (and backing up my good mentioned name!), as I've found so many people in the community to be very competitive when there really isn't much to compete for... Sometimes I think people are right when they say the AMV community is heading for a Cosplay type disaster. So many butting heads...

Vlad - I'm glad you showed up - we seem to share a very similar philosophy. I don't remember if I said it in post as well (it's very long - I wouldn't read it), but you're right - use what you can. If you've got two milk cartons that happen to process video, by god man, make some art!

This thread has gone a bit off track... When Pat comes around and there's no response to his original question... sorry about that!

Oh, I would like to say that I would hate it if my room was like Lain's! I mean, it's so dirty... the heads on my VCRs would be all messed up!Imagine the dust! IMAGINE THE DUST!!! I'm very proud of my clean, dust free computers. Well, the old PC wasn't exactly dust free... but it wasn't exactly well built either...

What have we told you? Shut up when you're done writing. Just take your fingers away from the keyboard and type "dash N."

Okay.

-N

madmallard · Post by **madmallard** » Fri Feb 07, 2003 3:36 am

what i dont get, what i TRULY don't get is. . .and i thought about this after quu made a video from psx movies and i made one from saturn movies. . .

If your sourcefootage is already being overkilled by the editing system you use, whats the point of upsampling to lossless? (or in our case, higher rez)

i could only think of one reason: any transition you create with a higher rez or upsample will look better. Everything else will look the same. . .

lossless is useless to us. We're not into content creation, we're recycling. At best we're adding filters to liven things up. We're recylcing truly consumer grade materials into something, and uncompressed is just . . .so useless to us in that sense.

I mean, source comes to us only in a couple of ways. 1-dvd, 2-vhs, 3-LD, and 4-(i'm reaching for this) SVHS. (i wont dignify downloads)

what good would lossless be for dvd source? its already been compressed, and in most cases, not very well. I wonder how high the highest bitrate video signal is on an anime disc? you think it even touches the spec limit? this would be the equivalent of dumping a 96kps MP3 to a 96khz wav. A bloated file that looks, or sounds, the same.

and vhs? okay, is some cases the color control can look better than a dvd (but it has to be very poorly planned), but the drop is resolution detail is the obvious handoff. lossless for this is kinda like photgraphing a photograph.

only the last 2, to me anyways, would justify lossless because of their balance of detail and color info. . .and you just dont get that much new stuff on either. you can still get old lds everywhere i'm sure. . . .

umn. . and as far as the lains room bit, dont forget quu has 4 cats now. . .