This forum is for users to exchange information and discuss with other users about a TMPGEnc product.
In case you need official support, please contact TMPG Inc.
TMPGEnc Authoring Works 4 BBS [ Sorted by thread creation date ]
Authoring Works flags my Mpeg 2 as non-compliant and wants to re-encode it if it's 29.97 frames per second. If I make the same video 23.976 frames per second it passes as compliant. Or if I change it to interlaced it passes.
Can I not do 1080p at 29.97?
The extension is .mp2 with .wav audio. I've tried really low bitrates and it doesn't seem to matter.
Yes, you can connect your camcorder to your computer via firewire and TAW4 will be able to see any files recorded on it as if it were an external drive. You can then output to DVD, Blu-ray or DivX Ultra formats.
I don't think it's possible. If you have multiple tracks, it wouldn't know which track's subtitles to show, and there's no way to set it manually. I think the closest you can get is to go track menu only with title page.
I built a project using files on my external drive. Now do to extraordinary circumstances I can't explain, the drive letter of the external drive has changed.
Is there a way to change the drive letter of the source files in TMPGEnc Authoring Works 4?
I'm afraid there isn't even though there should be.
First (this is optional), you can check for which source files can't be found in their usual place by using the Project File Check Tool. Find this in the Start Stage-->Advanced Tools-->Project File Check Tool.
This tool lets you select a saved project file and see which source files can't be found where they're supposed to be. You can't change the path from here, but you can at least make a note of which files need to be relinked.
Next, go back to the Start Stage and select to open a saved project and open the project file in question.
An error message will appear for each source file it can't find. Each error message has a "Browse.." button that you can click to select the new path for the source file. Do that for each source file and you'll be good to go!
I have a 1080i NTSC source file that is around 15gb. I choose my output as Blu ray NTSC and choose smart rendering instead of re-encoding. When authoring, why does it re-encode my file? I am not sure why it is doing this since blu ray output is around 23gb and i have enough space for my file without having to "fit" to disc.
Also please explain the "motion" sequences options. My files have many fast motion sequences, so would i be better off selecting "high" or "highest" to remove the interlacing that is appearing in my output during these sequences?
Does choosing "high" or "highest" extend processing time for authoring?
Smart rendering will only be active if the source file is compliant with the output format. If it won't activate, then there's something non-compliant about the source file. What is the framerate of the source video?
In regards to the motion options, setting it to higher levels will make the encoding more accurate but it will take longer to process.
Here's the help file description:
"Sets the precision of the motion detection stage of the encoder. The better the precision is, the better the data allocation and therefore the compression efficiency. However, higher precision will result in a longer encoding time."
Also, where did you get the source file? Are you sure it's encoded as MPEG-2? It might be MPEG-4, which is why it won't utilize smart rendering. Authoring Works can only encode MPEG-2 Blu-rays, so any MPEG-4 sources will not be smart rendered (such as AVCHD).
Also, if you change any track settings like framerate, bitrate, aspect ratio, etc., the file will not be smart rendered. If you put two videos in the same track and they don't have the same traits, one of them will not be smart rendered.
I think i solved my problem with the authoring output time. My original source file was interlaced and i changed the video encoder settings to progressive. When left alone, the authoring time was reduced 5x.
but to answer your question, the extension was .ts and it is MPEG -2.
I think i solved my problem with the authoring output time. My original source file was interlaced and i changed the video encoder settings to progressive. When left alone, the authoring time was reduced 5x.
but to answer your question, the extension was .ts and it is MPEG -2.
What is the different between TMPGEnc Authoring Works 4 & TMPGEnc 4.0 XPres. I am using TMPGEnc Authoring Works 4 to convert DVD-VR to DVD video. Then whatis the use of TMPGEnc 4.0 XPres if i can do converting with TMPGEnc Authoring Works 4.
Please advise and thanks for answering my queries
Here is the scenario / situation that i need help in linking the tracks:
1 Main Menu (text only)
4 Tracks (i want to show them only on the main menu)
Each track has 5-6 chapters
I would like the user (after inserting the disc) to be able to see the Main Menu with 4 track options to choose from. When they select a certain track, i want the user to be able to go straight to that track and view the clips. I do not want them to have to go to another sub menu or page and then have to select play, previous, etc. I want it very simple.
How can i properly link this?? I tested this out on the simulation and was able to do what i wanted it to do when i used my mouse pointer, but i could not use the directional arrows to properly navigate which means it needs to be linked.
Do the "play" and "return" buttons, etc. have to be visable in order for the linking to work? In other words, can i hide these buttons and still be able to link, or can i use the track texts that i created to allow the user to play the clips in place of the "play" buttons??
>Let me ask you, why is it important for the 4 text links to be properly navigated to each other?
Isn't that what you wanted?
>How can i properly link this?? I tested this out on the simulation and was able to do what i wanted it to do when i used my mouse pointer, but i could not use the directional arrows to properly navigate which means it needs to be linked.
I need some help. I recently purchased TMPGEnc Works 4. When i used the trial version to convert my HD Mpeg 2 files to SD with 16:9 ratio, i was very pleased with the resulting video output quality. The SD output was "true" to the original HD source. I was elated. I record many American football games in HD and when i have used other softwares for encoding, the resulting output was what i call a "movie" version of the football game. TMPGEnc was the only one that gave me the results i wanted.
Now, i purchase the full version, use the same settings as i did with the trial version, and the result is the "movie" version instead of the "true" version. Most of my clips are around 2-5 gig, either 1080i or 720p, and 30 or 60fps.
Can someone help me on this? It is hard to hard to explain without showing someone the end result.
I think you need to explain the difference between what you call the "movie" version and the "true" version, because no one's gonna know what you're talking about. Is it not as clear, not as smooth, are the colors different? Try to describe it.
Can you take a screenshot of a frame from the video from the "movie" version and the same frame from the "true" version?
Tkrave, it is like the "movie" version is not in "real" time whereas the "true" version is. It is like the "movie" version is running a tad faster than the "true" version. The frames per seconds seem faster. While watching the football game, you can see the "ticker" scores at the bottom scroll a little faster than the "true" version. Now my a/v is in sync so that has not been a problem.
I wish i had the terminology to explain myself.
I don't think a screen shot will be able to show what i am talking about. Is there anyway i could send you 2 discs of the same clip so you could see what i am talking about (at my expense, of course).
Does the audio get out of sync towards the end of the video? Or does the audio and video stay in sync throughout?
As for sending samples, can you create 20-30 second clips of each version and upload the output files to Rapidshare, megaupload, or some other file sharing service? That might be easier.
Well, first create some sample clips. Use the same output settings as you usually do, but just use the cut-editor to cut everything but a 20 to 30 second clip (this will keep the output file size small). Try to output the same section of the video for the Trial/"true" version and the Full/"movie" version.
After you've output your files (you don't have to burn them, just output them to your hard drive), upload the .vob file (go to your output folder-->video_ts folder-->look for the largest .vob file and that's probably it) to rapidshare.com.
At rapidshare.com, you just hit the browse button, find your file, and upload. Then post the download link they give you here.
Ok have had a look side by side for these, firstly, the full version recording seems to be the better one in my opinion, except for the fact that the aspect ratio has squashed the picture a bit. Not sure how you change that though to get the full screen look.
Second, the settings for each recording are different, the trial version is interlaced, and the full version is progressive. Takeing the clips into tmpgenc tells you that.
How that effects the quality/speed/frames per second I'm not sure, someone else may be able to answer that.
Can you tell me why you think the "full" version is better? Is there more clarity, sharpness, etc??
I record many sporting events in HD and convert to SD. To me, the "trial" version seems more "live" or "true" to the actual sporting event than does the " full" version sample.
Do you see it that way or does any of this make sense??
I appreciate your insight, suggestions, and thoughts!!
The Full version video seems sharper, whereas the trial version has got noticeable blur edges around the players.
Although it seems odd to watch televised sport with the black bars at the top and bottom. Maybe thats what you mean when you say it's not 'true'. To me the screen should be full when watched on the tv. I could do with knowing how to maintain the full screen aspect as well for some TV episodes I am putting on dvd.
Thanks for your observations on this. The reason for the black bars is because i selected "letterbox" in video properties. It has been my experience that "progressive" will solve the blurring that occurred in my trial version output.
I presume you viewed each video using your computer?? I wish someone could see the output on dvd and then compare.
But, still, i value your opinion and thanks for taking the time to review.
What kind of TV are you viewing this on? Is it a 4:3 SD TV?
What are your track settings for the Full version? If it's encoding the black bars into the video, it might be set to a 4:3 aspect ratio. If so, try setting it to 16:9 aspect ratio so it doesn't add the black bars. Your DVD player should be able to display it in the correct aspect ratio if played on a 4:3 tv.
Also, are you making a NTSC DVD or PAL DVD?
To me, the full version looks better than the trial version, but that's probably due to the fact that it's in progressive display mode. I say just get rid of the black bars in the full version and that would be the best.
There are the specs from the original dvd folder i created. As you can tell the specs are basically the same except the full version is progressive only. I am viewing both dvds on my 16:9 TV and the trial version represents a true live version of the football game while the full version represents a movie version of the game.
I know you all can't watch my dvd, but please explain this to me??
I am not trying to be difficult or hard headed, i just want to understand.
Well, there is a difference between the way an interlaced image looks and a progressive image, so that might be part of what you're seeing. If the source was interlaced to begin with, then maybe your eyes are used to the interlaced look, which is why the trial version looks better to you.
Also, if your full version video has the black bars encoded into the video like the samples you provided, you're not getting a full 720x480 image, since the bars are taking up some of that space. That means you're not getting as much image information which may also be why the full version doesn't look as good.
Just looking for a bit of clarification around writeable media to burn my output to.
Let's say I have created a dvd (audio_ts, video_ts) with menu's etc, and has outputted to around 7gb. Instead of shrinking to fit on a normal 4.5gb dvdr, I'd like to burn the dvd to a 8.5gb disc, and still be able to play as a normal dvd on my dvd player.
I'm confused though, my laptop (hp compaq 6530b) says it can write dvdr DL (double layer), but is this the correct media for then watching on a dvd player like a normal dvd? Whats the difference between double layer and dual layer??
Excuse the ignorance, this is the first time I've stepped out of the safe clutches of dvd5.
It should be fine for playing on a regular DVD player. Most commercial/store-bought DVD's are dual-layer so you shouldn't have problems playing it. Dual layer and double layer are the same thing.
I burn double layer or dual layer discs all the time. Since your laptop cannot write to this media, you will need to purchase a dvd burner that will support double layer writing. There are a lot of good deals on the internet for these burners.
If i may make a suggestion, only use Verbatim +R DL blank media to burn. These are the most reliable on the market. Stay away from Memorex, sony, and ritek. TDK is pretty reliable, but Verbatim is the best. A good deal for these is around $1.30 per disc.
I have a hp compaq 6530b, says on the spec that it supports writing to double layer dvds. So hopefully it should be ok as is. Cheers for tips on the media too.
Is that the check box where you set background audio? Thats for when your audio is shorter than the length of your menu, be it just audio or motion too.
So if your audio is about 4 seconds, move the End point to the 4 second mark. If you don't, it assumes the audio is as long as the video and it won't loop.
Hi
I do move the end to the point where the audio finish.But still it wont loop.and i don't really understand what you mean if i don't set up correctly.When you import audio it automatically will set the length of the audio to be the entire file.
It sounds like you understand, because you're saying the same thing I'm saying.
-When you import background audio, it assumes the audio is as long as the background video.
-You have to move the End mark to the actual end of the audio. Obviously, the looping audio option should be checked (see screenshot, lower right corner): http://i39.tinypic.com/14wadzr.png
-If you don't check that box, or set an End mark, the audio will not loop.
Question that may seem strange to some, but will a bluray player (Standalone) play a BD-r disc with a DVD format file burned on it?
The video files I have are long in length but low in quality so making a high quality blu ray format disc would not be of benefit. What would be of benefit would be (to save space on my shelves) to put 24 DVD'Rs onto a 50gb bdr disc. (In other words create a 45gb dvd file).
Would this work?
Has anyone tried using BDR for space saving / archiving purposes rather than quality.
This is possible since DVD-Video is BD-compliant. That also means smart rendering will be switched on so it won't re-encode the video and output should be pretty fast. I haven't actually made a disc with a ton of DVD-Video on it, but I've imported DVDs into a BD project so I know it's possible.
For space considerations, now that 25Gb blue ray disks are about $1.50, I take standard def video and put this in a blue ray project, set the video to not re-encode and no problem. It is a blue ray disk (complete with pop up menus) that simply plays back at standard definition on a blue ray player.