So I guess I can return the question back to you, Manono: Now that you know what I specifically do with Virtualdub and my results, is there some reason why I shouldn't use it? For cleaning purposes, what would be so different if I did it with Avisynth? Am I messing up my video by using both, Virtualdub and AviSynth? (a powerful combination, as expressed by many). But if V-dub is doing a great job with cleaning up my video, again, why take unecessary extra steps?
So I don't completely dismiss it's purpose for my goals. No doubt, Avisynth is serving it's purpose with frameserving to HC, converting to YUV12 and now, IVTC. These are videos that I care for and carefully look for every little detail, stitch and flaw. And I don't mean "oh it's good enough, let me be lazy and leave it at best" fantastic. I have done many tests and my video, after filtering with V-dub, looks fantastic. The interlaced chroma issue is easily handled in Virtualdub if I directly load my MPEG file in it and adjust in Color Depth, and that's all there is to it. However, considering my ONLY goal is to clean video and nothing more, I don't see the need to take the extra step. I understand that I can call Neatvideo in AviSynth. I use Neatvideo, which is an excellent plug-in for Virtualdub, as you might be aware of.
Lrtimelapse deflicker not working tv#
I've used it for purposes other than frameserving, and it's a great tool too! However, my only goal is to clean up my video from dirt and grain, in order to make it look presentable on TV (I am aware that I can do this with Avisynth-please keep reading). I understand that Avisynth can assist with accomplishing various tasks. Virtualdub is a fantastic tool and it's never given me any problems. I can see my adjustments in real time, instead of having to reload scripts, and retype arguments and/or settings, to then continuously re-load. It's an excellent tool if used correctly. Is there some reason you don't use AviSynth for the filtering? In a short answer: I like Virtualdub! There's another encoder that I heard about that is used strictly for anime I think, but can't remember the name now. And I don't care about the file size, really I just want good quality. I mean, is it? Would it make a difference? I mean, common sense tells me that although I may be using more bitrates that I need (hence inflating my file size), I would certainly not be ruining my visual quality. I perfer to set the average and maximum bitrates close to each other (to simulate CBR) than go to another encoder.
I've gotten so used to HcEnc, I really woudn't want to use Qenc. After doing ALOT of experimenting I can't believe I even compared the two.
Lrtimelapse deflicker not working windows#
I feel like a moron making the statements I did in the past about Windows DVD Maker and HcEnc.and would like to put all that nonsense to rest. Usually_quiet: I know, I know (regarding Windows). Re AQ: Ok, so you say that raising AQ DOES increase bitrates in flat areas, correct? I'm confused about your "harmful" statement. Is this a problem? What d you mean "harmful"? Most NTSC shows are Telecined with fields.
0 kommentar(er)
