>
> Now, the result generated by mpeg2enc has a few quality issues when compared to the
> result obtained with a commercial DVD authoring
> packet, but I really would like to switch to mpeg2enc and dvdauthor instead of that
> commercial program.
>
> The following two links demonstrate the issue
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 04:16, Selva Nair wrote:
> Hi Anne,
>
Hi, Selva
> At last I managed to reproduce your stuttering audio on another machine
> with the latest xine (xine-lib-1-rc5, xine-ui-0.99.2). The older
> version of xine plays it fine, thou
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 23 Aug 2004 21:56, Selva Nair wrote:
>
> [*] The last time I used yuvscaler it did not support -O DVD,
It seems to work OK now - I used it to change 768 to 720
> but I haven't touched it after y4mscaler appeared. Make sure
I don't have y4m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 23 Aug 2004 21:31, Selva Nair wrote:
>
> Have you tried playing any dvd-rate mpeg2 file from disk? You
> can copy, say, a short chapter from a dvd and try. If you have ogle,
> mplayer or vlc, try those too.
I tried that, and it played fine
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> I don't have y4mscaler. In fact I've seen mention of several tools that I
> don't appear to have. Are they from cvs?
The other tools you've seen mentioned are indeed from the cvs
version of mjpegtools. y4mscaler is not, at this time
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 04:16, Selva Nair wrote:
> > Hi Anne,
> >
> Hi, Selva
>
> > At last I managed to reproduce your stuttering audio on another machine
> > with the latest xine (xine-lib-1-rc5, xin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 16:52, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > I don't have y4mscaler. In fact I've seen mention of several tools that
> > I don't appear to have. Are they from cvs?
>
> The other tools you'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 18:46, Selva Nair wrote:
>
> Even if the issue was with the mplex rate, that much fine tuning should
> not be required. I never had any audio problem with mpeg2enc/mplex
> although I haven't used used extreme values of bit rates.
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Selva Nair wrote:
> I do not understand why multiplex rate should affect playback, that's why
> I left it for your experimentaion instead of spamming the list
> with my half-baked conclusions ;)
It doesn't - at least I've never had it. Lowering the bitrate
Hi,
>
> Tutorial time again, though ;-) First, what do these parameters mean (it's
> not obvious from the man page)?
> - -4 2 -2 1
I dont know much about mpeg2 encoding to comment on that; I can only say
that -4 and -2 takes an argument in the range 1 to 4, smaller numbers lead
to a more tho
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 19:18, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
>
> > although I haven't used used extreme values of bit rates. Possibly
> > something is wrong with xine too: if you run xine with --verbose you may
> > get some messages on audio drifts, if any.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 19:56, Selva Nair wrote:
> > Then, the problems I've had appear to be caused by the way I have created
> > the avi. This was done by grabbing a series of single frames, creating
> > 25fps avis from them, creating transition avis
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> OK - I prepared a coda_q4.mpg and launched xine from a console. I saw exactly
> what you have both been suggesting:
>
> xine: found demuxer plugin: MPEG program stream demux plugin
> av_offset=0 pts
> spu_offset=0 pts
> fixing sound card drift by -1453
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 20:20, Selva Nair wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > OK - I prepared a coda_q4.mpg and launched xine from a console. I saw
> > exactly what you have both been suggesting:
> >
> > xine: found demuxer plugin: MPE
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> It isn't that I de-interlaced. I wanted a series of 5-second-ish stills
> pulled from the main video - a sort of summary to pull things together
> instead of the abrupt ending. I started each of these from a single frame
> pulled from the main recordi
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> It isn't that I de-interlaced. I wanted a series of 5-second-ish stills
> pulled from the main video - a sort of summary to pull things together
If the main video was interlaced then the stills need to be treated
as interlaced.
> the
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
>
> I did try it in totem, but that yielded no info at all. The result was at
> least as bad as with xine, possibly worse.
totem is just another front-end to xine that uses the
same xine-library for playback, isn't it?
Selva
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 21:27, Selva Nair wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > I did try it in totem, but that yielded no info at all. The result was
> > at least as bad as with xine, possibly worse.
>
> totem is just another front-end
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 21:13, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > It isn't that I de-interlaced. I wanted a series of 5-second-ish stills
> > pulled from the main video - a sort of summary to pull things together
>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 21:23, Selva Nair wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > It isn't that I de-interlaced. I wanted a series of 5-second-ish stills
> > pulled from the main video - a sort of summary to pull things together
> > instea
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > Did you create the audio track in little pieces (individual .mp2 files)...
> >
> No, it was taken from an avi in one piece - except that there was an edit of
> 2-3 frames of the avi, IIRC, near the beginning to correct a wobble - which
> explains the
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 Aug 2004 21:23, Selva Nair wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > Out of curiosity, how did you end up with a 768x576 interlaced PAL avi?
That's the square pixel PAL full frame size of course ;)
768/576 =
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> > > Out of curiosity, how did you end up with a 768x576 interlaced PAL avi?
>
>
> That's the square pixel PAL full frame size of course ;)
>
> 768/576 = 4/3
I know, but I avoid capture cards that generate "square pixels" from
non-squa
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Selva Nair wrote:
> I know, but I avoid capture cards that generate "square pixels" from
> non-square pixel sources. As you know PAL or for that matter NTSC frames
It's not generating square from non-square. It's sampling the
analog waveform at a frequency
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
>
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Selva Nair wrote:
>
> > I know, but I avoid capture cards that generate "square pixels" from
> > non-square pixel sources. As you know PAL or for that matter NTSC frames
>
> It's not generating square from non-square.
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Selva Nair wrote:
> Agreed, if its sampling at 14.75Mhz no scaling is needed, only a 1
> pixel padding.
Oops - slight misunderstanding there. For PAL if it was sampling at
13.5MHz there would be no need for scaling because the card would be
giving 70
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
>
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Selva Nair wrote:
>
> > Agreed, if its sampling at 14.75Mhz no scaling is needed, only a 1
> > pixel padding.
>
> Oops - slight misunderstanding there. For PAL if it was sampling at
> 13.5MHz there would be no n
27 matches
Mail list logo
