MPEG-4 video encoding with Nero Recode

[xtknight]

So is H.264/2-pass (Nero HDTV AVC profile) worth it over ASP/1-pass (Nero Standard profile) despite the higher CPU time demands?

Sizes (both set to 700M CD size):
(audio included in each)

Source MPEG-2 20Mbps CBR: 9.03 GB (9,697,421,312 bytes)
Nero MPEG-4 Standard ASP: 688 MB (721,929,583 bytes)
Nero MPEG-4 HDTV AVC: 688 MB (722,209,028 bytes)

Encoding times:

Didn't time them exactly, but Standard/1-pass took about one hour and HDTV/2-pass took about five hours. This isn't 100% scientific but it should give you some idea. (I wasn't planning on posting results but I do have a few accurate comparison images to show below.)

Source:

Samsung SIR-T451 ATSC OTA HDTV receiver
Jay Leno 720p (#3057-12/9/05 Scarlett Johansson, Larry the Cable Guy, Fallout Boy)
S-Video
ATI TV Wonder USB 2.0
ATI Multimedia Center 9.08 TV record (MPEG-2 20Mbps CBR-No VideoSoap).
Nero Recode 2.2.7.2 (Nero 7 Ultra)

Notes: I had to use MPEG-2 20Mbps vs. uncompressed due to bandwidth and space issues.

Playback path:
(Media Player Classic 6.4.8.7 Unicode)

Nero Standard: Haali Demultiplexer ("MPEG4 video")->ffdshow MPEG-4 Video Decoder (XviD)->Video Mixing Renderer 9 (windowed)
Nero HDTV AVC: Haali Demultiplexer ("AVC video")->ffdshow MPEG-4 Video Decoder (libavcodec h264)->Video Mixing Renderer 9 (windowed)

CPU usage:
ASP: ~25%
AVC: ~50%

Frame-accurate comparisons:

Don't mind the green vertical bar at the left on the Standard encode. I had used a slightly different crop setting.

Time:

00:00:00: Standard / HDTV AVC
00:00:42: Standard / HDTV AVC
00:01:07: Standard / HDTV AVC
00:12:12: Standard / HDTV AVC
00:17:37: Standard / HDTV AVC
00:21:10: Standard / HDTV AVC
00:32:09: Standard / HDTV AVC
00:32:15: Standard / HDTV AVC
00:59:56: Standard / HDTV AVC
01:00:05: Standard / HDTV AVC

Conclusion:

Overall, little difference. But when you bring high-motion or complex scenes into the equation, HDTV AVC encoding really shines. Since I'm picky about video quality, I'd just let the HDTV AVC run overnight. It's worth the extra quality to me. Besides, they're the same size. It's hard to say if the difference is because of the 2-pass or AVC. I think it's the AVC. But I recommend you run 2-pass regardless. It shouldn't take much longer. This was a little less controlled than I had hoped it to be, but the comparison was an afterthought and I thought I'd share it anyway.

What do you think?

 

[aidanjm]

interesting.

 

[Farfle]

Honestly, probably a rather static show like Jay Leno isn't a good comparison for the codecs. Fast movement scenes make or break a compression's quality. For over 3 years now, two-pass encoding has become the norm because of how much more efficient it is with it's bitrate allocation per scene. I, personally, havn't used AVC yet to encode a source, but rest assured, if 2-pass was available i'd use it just about every time. The only time I can see it not being feasible is in real-time encoding of TV shows (if you're encoding live straight to MPEG-4).

 

[SynthDude2001]

Jay Leno 720p (#3057-12/9/05 Scarlett Johansson, Larry the Cable Guy, Fallout Boy)

Hmm...where do you live that NBC broadcasts in 720p? That source might already be less than optimal since it was originally recorded/broadcast in 1080i, I think. (Edit: Guess it might not matter too much overall if you're scaling it down over S-Video to begin with, if I'm reading your post correctly)

Do you happen to know if Nero Recode makes use of multiple CPU's? (I've got an Opteron 170 here ready for just such a use...)

I would definitely like to see how the 2-pass profile does for scenes with a lot of motion. I think that, as long as 2-pass didn't take several days for long recordings or anything, I would go with that just to have the highest possible quality for the size, like you said.

Edit again: I can definitely see the difference between two in the last screenshot set, like the guy's hands for example. The Standard profile seems to have noticeable artifacts. Looks like I'll have to try this out for myself. (Luckily my recordings of 24 in HD are small enough to fit on a single DVDR, but it would be nice to have them in a smaller format if I needed to send anyone else an episode they missed or something)

 

[xtknight]

Wow..talk about bumping an old thread.

SynthDude2001: I have no clue but I just set my tuner box to 720p and then let it flow in to the S-Video thing. But crap, it's been so long I can't remember if it was 720p I set it to or 480p. I don't know if it would matter through S-Video.

Nero Recode? Uhh...no clue. I know DivX Helium is SMP-aware.

I could see how it is at the beginning of Jay Leno when they pan over the crowd (for fast motion).

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: xtknight
Wow..talk about bumping an old thread.

SynthDude2001: I have no clue but I just set my tuner box to 720p and then let it flow in to the S-Video thing. But crap, it's been so long I can't remember if it was 720p I set it to or 480p. I don't know if it would matter through S-Video.

Nero Recode? Uhh...no clue. I know DivX Helium is SMP-aware.

I could see how it is at the beginning of Jay Leno when they pan over the crowd (for fast motion).

Yeah, I have used Divx Helium before. Speed seemed to be pretty good, but for some reason I had a hell of time actually trying to play back the files... (I'm sure I was probably just missing something simple)

And I didn't know this thread was so old, blame aidanjm for bumping it

 

[JAG87]

like day and night to me, but it is not worth my time.
H264 is a winner, but you need some beefy processor to take advantage of it, there is no way I am letting my computer sit for days to encode a movie.

 

[1Dark1Sharigan1]

Yeah H264 generally gives a more blurred image than xvid but as mentioned, has much less noticeable pixelation when it comes to motion-intensive scenes . . .

Time-wise, yeah it is slow. On my 3000+ @ 2.7 GHz, it took about like ten hours to encode "Return of the King" to a 4GB MP4 with Highest settings in Nero Recode.

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: 1Dark1Sharigan1
Yeah H264 generally gives a more blurred image than xvid but as mentioned, has much less noticeable pixelation when it comes to motion-intensive scenes . . .

Time-wise, yeah it is slow. On my 3000+ @ 2.7 GHz, it took about like ten hours to encode "Return of the King" to a 4GB MP4 with Highest settings in Nero Recode.

Ten hours...that's (to me) not horribly slow for a 3-4 hour movie, especially if the encoding speed scales somewhat linearly with number of processors.

I assume by "Highest" you mean 2-pass?