I am transferring a bunch of old VHS tapes to PC format.
I'm capturing to MPEG2, but would then like to convert to DIVX to make
files smaller.
I know VHS quality is fairly low, but I have no idea what resolution
(e.g.) I can compress it to without loosing quality.
If I'm converting to DIVX what should I set for the follwoing?
frame rate (leave at 29.97)
screen rez (320 x 240?)
data rate? (100kbps? 250kbps)
audio(128kbps?)

Any suggestions to keep my file sizes down with loosing anything would
be appreciated!

Thanks!

"Frank G" <frankgrimesjr@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1188582229.973691.162620@22g2000hsm.googlegro ups.com...
If you use AutoGK you can predetermine both the file size you want and the
resolution - the payload is the time it takes. If you simply select the file
size you want and the resolution on auto then AutoGK will do it in the
quickest possible time. I use for all my transfers to DivX regardless of
source material a fixed width of 720 and then decide what file size I want
depending on the length and quality of the original - generally 1 CD for
movie length and half a cd for TV eps of series. Works for me..



ex meus usus

On Aug 31, 12:43 pm, Frank G <frankgrime...@gmail.com> wrote:
Here is my cookbook recipe:

Target 2 hours of mpeg2 video, plus or minus, per DVD at full D1,
720x480i; with a bit rate of 7000. This will upscale the VHS data
stream. I think that it gives the video more sparkle and looks much
better than the original VHS when played back on DVD. There is much
data to support that the perceived quality of a 7000 bit rate is much
higher than 6000, but the difference between 7000 and 8000 is not that
much.

Many people like half-D1, 352x480, which allows lower bit rates and
will store twice as much data. This also is an upscale from VHS.

I will sometimes temove the head noise from the captured video by
running it through TmpgEnc Encoder and cropping that portion of the
image.

After capture, then author with TmpgEnc DVD Author, version 1.6,
ignoring any warnings that the DVD is too large. DvdShrink version
3.2 is then used further compress the authored DVD to an ISO image
before burning to DVD with DvdDecrypter or ImgBurn.

Cheers....

On Sep 4, 3:30 am, Mark Burns <marcus520...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Why are you encoding your video twice?? (once with TMPGEnc encoder and
again with DVD Shrink)
There is NO reason to use DVDShrink if you correctly set your video
encoding bitrate in TMPGEnc Encoder.
If you're going to put 2 hours of video on a single layer DVD (DVD5),
then your average video bitrate is going to need to be around 4500
kbit/sec - NOT 7000 kbit/sec.
Check out this bitrate calculator, it will help you figure out what
bitrates to use... http://dvd-hq.info/Calculator.html

On Sep 7, 1:12 am, yeltz <yeltzi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
DvdShrink is a transcoder, not an encoder. It therefore runs in
minutes, not hours. Read here for more information:

http://www.doom9.org/index.html?/mpg...ink31-main.htm

Also, VHS captures are done very well for the past few years with a
hardware encoder such as a capture card or set top DVD recorder. I
didn't mention TmpgEnc encoder, but rather the TmpgEnc DVD Author
which never encodes.

I am also assuming variable bit rates here, therefore any before the
fact bitrate calculation is going to be an approximation. One will
maximize their utilization of the DVD by authoring the DVD and then
shrinking it to size, if any shrinking is necessary. Also, DVD Shrink
has a very good deep analysis for maximizing the quality of the
output. I would never recommend a constant bit rate capture.

The 7000 is simply a max size for about 80 minutes of video at that
rate. It is simply something that I simply set and forget.

Today, bitrate calculators are good for approximations but are not
necessary for pre-calculating sizes. I remember the days before
DvdShrink or Pinnacle Instant Copy when they were, but not for a long
time.

Cheers...

"Mark Burns" <marcus520520@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1189384052.934476.266450@o80g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
You're relying on on-board MPEG2 conversion and you seem to
agree with me that a higher bit rate, full D1, SD capture makes
for better images. I'm curious why you do not capture at the
maximum bit rate of the capture device - since you're going to
Shrink to fit anyway?

HDD is nearing the cost, and way surpassing the convenience, of
rewritable DVD5 media (and far outstrips DVD9 for both); thus
I'm wondering too why you'd even bother writing DVDs, let alone
shrink the capture (which is only done to suit the media)?

I've recently opted for 750 GB eSATA drives (slightly more
costly than other external drives because I also use
front-loadable, hot swap housings). These drives hold about 140
hours each of 12 mbps SD captures, slightly less for highest
bit-rate HDTV captures. When not on-line, each drive consumes
less shelf space than 2 DVDs in their typical cases (or about
the same as 4 DVDs in slim-jewel cases), yet they hold more than
150 DVD5s can. Presently these drives are about $200 each. 150
DVD+RW and cases cost nearly the same.

If the material to be captured needs no editing, the capture can
be done directly to the removable drive. Otherwise, it is the
target of the editing process. Thus my capture steps are
either a) capture, b) catalogue; or a) capture, b) edit, c)
catalogue.

The only reason I can imagine for continuing to use DVD media is
for distribution. I suspect that those converting to DVD from
VHS were not doing a lot of distribution? And I opine that,
distribution does not mean lending, rather it means making a
copy for the recipient - in which case one does not need to have
DVDs on one's own shelf.

The arguments, which were true in the past, against noisy, ugly
PCs in the darkened entertainment area no longer apply. Small
footprint PCs that are extremely quite and power conservative
look little different and consume no more space than some HDVRs.