Comments

BillyBoy wrote on 8/19/2003, 5:41 PM
You MAY sometimes get a better render in TMPGEnc with MPEG-1. I doubt you will with MPEG-2. You could frame serve using the Satish plug-in, or render as as AVI then open in TMPGNC. The VEG file is useless outside of Vegas since it only serves as "notes" prior to rendering and contains no actual video footage.
donp wrote on 8/19/2003, 10:09 PM
From a former Studio user too. Just render An AVI in Vegas and and load it into Tmpegnc. Vegas does a pretty good mpeg2 render too, but I still use Tmpegnc because I need separate video and audio as I transcode the audio .wav file to ac3 with Besweet. Saw your farewell in the Pinnacle Studio 8 forum.
colorider wrote on 8/20/2003, 9:36 AM
I am having a much better life now that I have left the studio 8 nightmare. I am only playing around with the tmpgnc program because I read so much about it on the dvdrhelp website. They praise it bigtime. I tend to get a little better brightness detail with it, but that is about all. Also, the titles and text is clearer. I am just playing around at this point and having fun with the Vegas stuff. I did a project in 1 hour that would have taken me at least 8 or more with Studio8. Loving it!!!!!!!!!!
BillyBoy wrote on 8/20/2003, 12:25 PM
One thing you need to keep in mind when reading posts, reviews and how-to at VCD/DVD help site is most of the applications they refer to are either FREE or shareware. Rarely do they get into more robost commerical grade applications. So the opinions there should be taken with a few grains of salt. That isn't to say some of the applications they suggest aren't good, they are, some are first rate, but don't limit your software universe. That pertains especially to TMPGEnc which was once upon a time was just freeware and thus the heaps of praise. Ditto for VirtualDub and to a lessor extend a few others.
colorider wrote on 8/20/2003, 4:43 PM
That would explain all the users of the software. I am doing some sample projects and comparing them. If it is just a little quality differance, I am going to stick with just using VV for everything.
Haw1144 wrote on 8/20/2003, 5:30 PM
I find that TMPGenc encodes a LOT faster into DVD MPG2. Definitely a lot faster to Render into AVI in VV, then compress into DVD MP2 vs. rendering DVD straight off of VV
BillyBoy wrote on 8/20/2003, 5:46 PM
Depends HOW you compare. Don't forget when you render from the timeline in Vegas to MPEG-2 you aren't just converting from AVI to MPEG-2 like you typically would in TMPGEnc. All the transations, effects, filters are getting applied so Vegas is doing a lot of work to render the file that TMPGEnc doesn't have to do.

If you render to AVI in Vegas, then start a new project with the rendered AVI file as the source it will fly along in making a MPEG-2 file. In fact on my newest system I get slightly BETTER than real time, so a 40 minute file renders in about 37 minutes. That's because all Vegas needs to do in the second pass is convert from AVI to MPEG. You need to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. Also if you typically render to multiple file types, like a AVI for DV tape and then MPEG-2 for a DVD, use the rendered file in a new project for the second rendering and Vegas will fly along. Just rendering from the timeline a second time results in Vegas analysing all the things already done.
Howdie wrote on 8/20/2003, 6:31 PM
sure but rendering to AVI you will get loss of quality !!! If that doesnt concern then by all means use it....

Has anyone tried the new Mainconcept mpeg2 encode fromr mainconcept (version 1.3)?? rather than the old version 1 in VV??
BillyBoy wrote on 8/20/2003, 8:13 PM
Not using the DV AVI template. Digital is digital. If you want to nitpick ok, maybe after 10 generations of taking result B then making C, then using C to make version D. Otherwise nope no loss of quality.

BTW using the seperate MC encoder not only isn't necessary, (a version of the MC encoder is included with Vegas) the version that comes with Vegas is better tuned to run with Vegas.