Forum Home
PC World Chat
 
Thread ID: 117571 2011-04-25 04:13:00 Downloading and making my own DVDs Morgenmuffel (187) PC World Chat
Post ID Timestamp Content User
1196877 2011-04-25 07:36:00 Youtube's compression is crappy.

It's not youtube's fault if the uploader provides a poor quality source file.

Have a look at these for some nice examples of youtube HD;

www.youtube.com
www.youtube.com

Best watched in HD and on a computer that is somewhat modern and somewhat powerful. Dual-core, at least.

Both videos are H264 - MPEG-4 AVC (part 10) (avc1)
ubergeek85 (131)
1196878 2011-04-25 10:21:00 Yes, but mpeg 2 is the dvd standard, and i am yet to see an mpeg 4 look nicer than an mpeg 2.

why do you think mpeg4 replaced 2 & 1 then?
why is it current industry (or aleast consumer yeah DV :punk) standard then?
icow (15313)
1196879 2011-04-25 10:41:00 It's not youtube's fault if the uploader provides a poor quality source file.



Which is more or less my point. Perhaps Goodiesguy could run his own server maybe.
Snorkbox (15764)
1196880 2011-04-25 11:02:00 Perhaps Goodiesguy could run his own server maybe.

With an AMD Athlon 64 3400+ and 1.5Gb of ram with Win7, good luck to him :lol:
ubergeek85 (131)
1196881 2011-04-25 11:07:00 It's not youtube's fault if the uploader provides a poor quality source file.

Have a look at these for some nice examples of youtube HD;

www.youtube.com
www.youtube.com

Best watched in HD and on a computer that is somewhat modern and somewhat powerful. Dual-core, at least.

Both videos are H264 - MPEG-4 AVC (part 10) (avc1)

Yes I can run those at 1080p full screen on my monitor but at that resolution the video plays faster than it is being downloaded. Looks good though.
:)
Trev (427)
1196882 2011-04-25 11:09:00 Yes I can run those at 1080p full screen on my monitor but at that resolution the video plays faster than it is being downloaded. Looks good though.
:)

Yep, that's why I download them first with DownloadHelper then playing them back with VLC - much better playback overall, I've found flash pretty bad for anything requiring oomph, or even stability...
ubergeek85 (131)
1196883 2011-04-25 11:22:00 With an AMD Athlon 64 3400+ and 1.5Gb of ram with Win7, good luck to him :lol:

Sigh. When I was 15 I knew everything. Now I'm somewhat older I'm still learning and adapt to changing circumstances as they happen.

With some people it's still reasonably easy to say, "I don't know but I will try and find out for you." Then you get back to them with the answer or actually be honest and admit that you don't know.
Snorkbox (15764)
1196884 2011-04-26 02:09:00 Ok, run into a snap

I haven't done this type of thing in years, previously i just bunged them in ashampoo studio (which I purchased) and it did its thing with menus etc.

Unfortunately Ashampoo has crashed twice 2 hours in, i am assuming its the transcoding bit its crashing on as it hadn't got to the burning to disk phase.

Any free relatively idiot proof software out there, that can do this easily
Morgenmuffel (187)
1196885 2011-04-26 03:04:00 Yes, but mpeg 2 is the dvd standard, and i am yet to see an mpeg 4 look nicer than an mpeg 2.

Almost any codec can look good with a high enough bitrate.

That and MPEG4 is semi-generic, it could be either the MP4 container, MPEG4-Part2 (h.263 / XviD / DivX) or MPEG4-Part10 (h.264 / x264) etc. and the compression on h.264 is significantly better than h.263.

en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org

There's no hard and fast rule about which you should use as a source to obtain the best quality, it depends on the bitrate / resolution that archive.org have these files in. Download both, see which looks best to you, then use that. You're *going* to incur a bit of degradation in quality during the conversion process, how important squeezing the best quality out of it is, is up to you.
Chilling_Silence (9)
1196886 2011-04-26 07:03:00 I suggested the MPEG-2's as the mpeg4's have greatly reduced quality and resolution and are not interlaced on Archive.org. The safest bet to go for on there are the interlaced mpeg2's as they are only decent copies on the site. trust me, the mp4's and ogg,s and mpeg1's look crappy on that site and are some of the worst encodes i've seen. goodiesguy (15316)
1 2 3