POV-Ray : Newsgroups : irtc.animations : MPEG encoder Server Time
25 May 2024 19:48:49 EDT (-0400)
  MPEG encoder (Message 16 to 25 of 25)  
<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages
From: Rune
Subject: Re: MPEG encoder
Date: 14 Jan 2002 17:16:39
Message: <3c4358c7@news.povray.org>
"ingo" wrote:
> http://www.tmpgenc.com/e_main.html

This is the one I use. I've never had any problems with it and it's very
easy to use. Yet I rarely see it mentioned when people ask - which lead me
to the question...

Is there anything it doesn't do as well as other encoders?

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated Jan 2)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk


Post a reply to this message

From: Jetlag
Subject: Re: MPEG encoder
Date: 17 Jan 2002 13:22:41
Message: <3c471671$1@news.povray.org>
"Rune" <run### [at] mobilixnetdk> wrote in message
news:3c4358c7@news.povray.org...
> "ingo" wrote:
> > http://www.tmpgenc.com/e_main.html
>
> This is the one I use. I've never had any problems with it and it's very
> easy to use. Yet I rarely see it mentioned when people ask - which lead me
> to the question...
>
> Is there anything it doesn't do as well as other encoders?
>
> Rune

This has to be the best MPEG encoder there is. I haven't seen anything else
compare, except some packages that cost hundreds if not thousands of dollars and
high-end hardware encoders.


Post a reply to this message

From: Tom Galvin
Subject: Re: MPEG encoder
Date: 17 Jan 2002 15:09:03
Message: <3c472f5f$1@news.povray.org>
> > Is there anything it doesn't do as well as other encoders?
> >
> > Rune
>
> This has to be the best MPEG encoder there is. I haven't seen anything
else
> compare, except some packages that cost hundreds if not thousands of
dollars and
> high-end hardware encoders.
>
>

All it needs is PNG support ;)


Post a reply to this message

From: Chris Howie
Subject: Re: MPEG encoder
Date: 18 Jan 2002 00:31:26
Message: <3c47b32e@news.povray.org>
> Is there anything it doesn't do as well as other encoders?

My guess is that soon it will not be freeware.

__________________
Chris Howie
cra### [at] yahoocom
http://winimizer.virtualave.net


Post a reply to this message

From: John VanSickle
Subject: Re: MPEG encoder
Date: 18 Jan 2002 01:35:22
Message: <3C47C34D.7FE215B9@hotmail.com>
Chris Howie wrote:
> 
> > Is there anything it doesn't do as well as other encoders?
> 
> My guess is that soon it will not be freeware.

When the modeler I'm working on is to my satisfaction,. I'll probably
start working on an MPEG encoder/editor.  Something a little faster,
more featured, and more user-friendly than CMPEG...

-- 
ICQ: 46085459


Post a reply to this message

From: Chris Howie
Subject: Re: MPEG encoder
Date: 18 Jan 2002 06:07:34
Message: <3c4801f6@news.povray.org>
> When the modeler I'm working on is to my satisfaction,. I'll probably
> start working on an MPEG encoder/editor.  Something a little faster,
> more featured, and more user-friendly than CMPEG...

I'd welcome it.  Good luck on your project.  =)

__________________
Chris Howie
cra### [at] yahoocom
http://winimizer.virtualave.net


Post a reply to this message

From: Tom Bates
Subject: Re: MPEG encoder
Date: 18 Jan 2002 12:58:24
Message: <3c486240$1@news.povray.org>
Jetlag <bga### [at] microsoftcom> wrote in message
news:3c471671$1@news.povray.org...
> "Rune" <run### [at] mobilixnetdk> wrote in message
> news:3c4358c7@news.povray.org...
> > "ingo" wrote:
> > > http://www.tmpgenc.com/e_main.html
> >
> > This is the one I use. I've never had any problems with it and it's very
> > easy to use. Yet I rarely see it mentioned when people ask - which lead
me
> > to the question...
> >
> > Is there anything it doesn't do as well as other encoders?
> >
> > Rune
>
> This has to be the best MPEG encoder there is. I haven't seen anything
else
> compare, except some packages that cost hundreds if not thousands of
dollars and
> high-end hardware encoders.
>

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but ...

I had a look, and it appears that TMPGEnc encodes an AVI file and not the
original frames.

In my recent experience in searching for a suitable MPEG encoder, I tried a
couple of AVI to MPG converters, and it seemed that the AVI process
introduced some losses to image quality, then the MPEG process intorduced
more losses to image quality to the point that there were a couple of
seconds in my latest animation where image quality went right out the window
(I lost all detail in my landscape, and one of my characters became
completely obscured by the compression artifacts).

I then found CMPEG which started from the original frame image files.  It
was a bit tricky getting it to work, and it wasn't very fast, but the image
quality was much better than the AVI converters I tried and the MPG file
size was much smaller.

My animations are typically full-color 320x240 x 24bpp, and the AVI-to-MPEG
converters I tried allowed me about 20 to 33 seconds of animation while
staying within the IRTC 5MB limit.  CMPEG allowed about 50 seconds.

Putting this another way, I had 15 seconds of my animation complete when I
started evaluating MPEG encoders.  AVI2MPG produced a file about 2.5MB.
LSX-MPEG Encoder 3.0 Demo produced a file about 3.7MB.  CMPEG produced a
file about 1.5MB.

How does TMPGEnc avoid my "double-loss" problem? or does it?
And how is it for MPG file size?

--
Tom Bates
#local P=pigment{gradient y pigment_map{[0.46rgb 1][0.46rgb 0][0.54rgb 0]
[0.54rgb <1,0,0>]}}light_source{<10,-50,50>.9}light_source{<10,50,-50>.9}
#local P=pigment{gradient x pigment_map{[0.978P][0.978rgb 0][0.990rgb 0]
[0.990rgb <0,0,1>]}}light_source{<10,50,50>.9}light_source{<10,-50,-50>.9}
sphere{0.5 0.5pigment{P}finish{metallic ambient 0.2 diffuse 0.7 brilliance 6
reflection 0.25 phong 0.75 phong_size 80}}light_source{<210,50,-50>.9}
camera{location<2.1,.1,.9>look_at.5}


Post a reply to this message

From: ingo
Subject: Re: MPEG encoder
Date: 18 Jan 2002 18:03:11
Message: <Xns919BC53722Aseed7@povray.org>
in news:3c486240$1@news.povray.org Tom Bates wrote:

> How does TMPGEnc avoid my "double-loss" problem? or does it?

It works directly from the image files, not from an AVI.

> And how is it for MPG file size?

Depends on your settings, you can control, bit rate mode, order and type 
of frames (IPB), quantization matrix etc.

Ingo


Post a reply to this message

From: Batronyx
Subject: Re: MPEG encoder
Date: 18 Jan 2002 20:25:24
Message: <3c48cb04@news.povray.org>
>
> I had a look, and it appears that TMPGEnc encodes an AVI file and not the
> original frames.
>

Can't speak for TMPGEnc, but most apps that allow AVI creation allow you to
choose the codec, and one of those entries is almost always "Full Frames
(Uncompressed)". In fact I say 'almost' just to cover myself, but I've never
seen anything different since Win 3.1.


--
light_source{0,1}#macro c(J,a)sphere{0,1pigment{rgb z}scale a translate J+O}
#end#macro B(R,V,O)c(0,4)intersection{c(V,R)difference{c(-z*4x+10)c(-z*4.1x+
10)c(0<7.5,45,5>)}}#end B(12,0z*25)B(8y*4<0,12,50>)          // Batronyx ^"^


Post a reply to this message

From: Luke Church
Subject: Re: MPEG encoder
Date: 27 Jan 2002 10:02:25
Message: <3c541681@news.povray.org>
I tend to use FMP and the DivX codec, if that is any help.

    http://www.bigfoot.com/~rapidi
    http://members.xoom.com/rapidi

I don't know how good these are as encoders for space tight jobs like IRTC,
I'm afraid that I don't really have the amount of time or skill I would need
to make a viable entry...

Regards,

Luke

"Chris Howie" <cra### [at] yahoocom> wrote in message
news:3c4801f6@news.povray.org...
> > When the modeler I'm working on is to my satisfaction,. I'll probably
> > start working on an MPEG encoder/editor.  Something a little faster,
> > more featured, and more user-friendly than CMPEG...
>
> I'd welcome it.  Good luck on your project.  =)
>
> __________________
> Chris Howie
> cra### [at] yahoocom
> http://winimizer.virtualave.net
>
>


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.