>Can anybody comment on *why* TMPGEnc produces higher quality
>output? Is it just well-chosen defaults? I find that I can
>do pretty nearly whatever I want in terms of visual quality
>by using lavc options and filter plugins.
I don't know, but I've observed the same myself (see
http://www.transcoding.org/cgi-bin/transcode?FFmpeg_Vs._Mpeg2enc).
I'd have to dissect the TMpgEnc binary to figure out more, but given
that it takes significantly longer than either ffmpeg or mpeg2enc to
encode a given video clip, my completely uneducated guess is that it
tries many more parameter variations during the encoding process than
ffmpeg and mpeg2enc do.
--Andrew Church
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://achurch.org/
