Third Party MPEG Encoding From Timeline?

Mr_Plant wrote on 3/24/2003, 8:21 PM

Hello there. I am running the trial Vegas 4 download. Impressed I am! I am a Premiere user and am considering moving.. One thing puts me off... Rendering output options! I am not a fan of the built in MPEG encoding engine - preferring to use something like Cinemacraft Encoder - but there seems to no way to access such a third party coder from the timeline or menu commands - am I missing something?
Specifically, Cinemacraft - any way to access it from Vegas? Do any plugins for it exist?? Hope someone knows. I don't like the fact you seem to be locked to the built in encoder and thats that...

Comments

BillyBoy wrote on 3/24/2003, 8:34 PM

You're aren't locked into any encoder but the Main Concept MPEG-2 encoder is one of the better ones for DV. You can encode with any encoder on your system.

From File, select render as, in the window that pops up select AVI as file type, then click the CUSTOM button, then the video tab, then the down arrow to the right of video format. You'll then see a list of the encoders you have installed. Select the one you want, then press the configue button if the CODEC supports options.

MCTech wrote on 3/24/2003, 8:53 PM

In our past testing, the MainConcept encoding technology's speed was comparable to CinemaCraft's (and we're much faster on VCD and SVCD), and our quality appeared a bit better (with a bit more detail).

If you've found any concerns with the encoder, we would be glad to hear the details and address them specifically. Many things just turn out to be simple settings issues. If you're just hesitant to be "locked in" to having one encoder available from the Timeline, please bear in mind that it is very widely used technology -- and there have to be great reasons for that.

Mark
MainConcept

Mr_Plant wrote on 3/24/2003, 9:08 PM

No disrespect meant to MainConcept here! I was just wondering about other options.. I can see a list of installed codecs as mentioned a few replies back.. but specifically.. I can't see a way of accessing cinemacraft however.. Anyone tried this??

As for the mainconecept codec - how about pushing the quality a bit higher still in a future update.. at the expense of a slight slowdown in speed???

Last question - Can anyone let me know if the retail boxed version of Vegas 4 comes with a full printed manual??

Thanks for your replies so far. Appreciated.

Mr_Plant wrote on 3/24/2003, 9:13 PM

I will also add that the mainconcept coder interface is the best I have seen - all options/templates etc. are easy to access and are laid out excellently.
My only gripe is I wish it would "slow down" a bit and push for more quality instead - obviously going to annoy some people - how a about a new ultra quality encoding mode option??? (hint hint)... ;-)

BillyBoy wrote on 3/24/2003, 9:51 PM

You can download a 360 page PDF format manual off the web site. If the bitrate was much higher it would jam up a lot of DVD players. You can adjust the bitrate if you think it will get better result, probably won't, been there, done that.

Since you're using the demo (unless SoFo changed its polices recently) it doesn't include any means to import or encode any MPEG due to licensing restrictions.

Mr_Plant wrote on 3/25/2003, 1:36 AM

You are correct, I cannot use the mainconcept renderer in the Vegas demo - I have used it with my copy of Premiere 6.5 however - as both use the mainconcept mpeg encoder... So I am familiar with the interface and settings for it.. I am just interested to know about third party plugins. For example.. can you frameserve to TMPGENC from the timeline (you can set this up with Premiere using a plugin)...

Spot|DSE wrote on 3/25/2003, 1:47 AM

Whoa!
Don't think, or judge the quality of the MainConcept as it's seen in Premiere by how Vegas will work with it. It's not even CLOSE to the same. Vegas has some pre-processing that absolutely is made to work with the MainConcept codec. I've compared renders from several NLE/MainConcept systems. Vegas by FAR and away is the best. Not because of the implementation of the Main Concept, it's how they work with the image before it hits the encoder.
I can't argue for or against CinemaCraft, or anything else, except to say that the stuff coming out of Vegas is better than any in it's class. Certainly better than the lower end Minerva systems as well.
Try a 'real' version of Vegas, and play with it. You'll be shocked.

PeterMac wrote on 3/25/2003, 12:22 PM

Got to agree with you there, Spot!

I've tried them all, including CCE, and the MC encoder built in to Vegas gives me the best results. Interestingly, the built in encoder is even better - though not quicker - than MC's stand-alone encoder. I put this down to Vegas frame serving when it encodes from the timeline.

In fact, I am drawn ever more to the conclusion that the true determinant of the quality you'll end up with on your DVD, is the quality of your own footage. The biting sharpness and contrast of modern DV cameras is not really your friend here. A liitle less contrast (more fill-in light) and perhaps a pinch of gaussian softness might be worth experimenting with, Mr_Plant?

-Pete

Mr_Plant wrote on 3/25/2003, 5:38 PM

Thanks to everyone (especially SPOT - Look forward to the book!).
I am close to dumping premiere in favour of vegas..
One thing that really stands out about vegas is sonic foundry's excellent (as you would expect of course) handling of audio!

Paul_Holmes wrote on 3/25/2003, 5:57 PM

I'm glad Douglas Spotted Eagle weighed in here because as I read the posts I was perplexed. I have used trial versions of many encoders and have been astonished at the quality of Main Concept. It's interesting to hear that the combination of Main Concept and Vegas is the secret to such good results. Lately I've had a chance to work with 3-chip cameras and as I've always said about working with 1-chip, at 5000vbr or above I just can't see anything that makes playing it from the DV tape look any better than the finished product on DVD -- at least not anything someone viewing casually would notice. Of course some of you experts would see a flaw here and there, but I'm extremely pleased with the speed of render and the quality I get.

stepfour wrote on 3/25/2003, 6:18 PM

Now that Spring has sprung, I'll be shooting some outdoor sports stuff. I now use TMPGEnc Plus 2-Pass VBR (very nice) for sports/dancing clips. I hope MainConcept will consider adding some sort of multi-pass option. It's a long encode, but well worth the wait when dealing with video with a lot of fast motion.

DDogg wrote on 3/26/2003, 1:39 AM

I would answer you somewhat differently and more specific to your questions, at least I hope so. Vegas lacks the entire IPC (Inter Process Communication) infrastructure to export or frameserve to external applications like what you are used to with Premier, and other professional applications. This is the only big glaring hole I see in Vegas that keeps it from being a complete Premier killer (and lack of plugins). Heck, even the U-lead Pro NLE product (whatitsname) now has a plugin for external export, but sadly, not Vegas. I hope I am completely wrong, but I sometimes get the impression that SoFo does not really understand IPC (generic) frameserving technology and the tremendous benefits to the user that inbound and outbound frameserving deliver. IMHO, they can never totally woo users away from Premier without something equivalent to Premier's external export/plugin structure.

In my case I would use the ability to render DV source to Canopus ProCorder. While the internal Mainconcept encoder is >extremely< good (top two or three?) for interleaved NTSC and Pal DV, I think most encoding specialists agree that it is quite a fair bit inferior to ProCorder for that same interlaced source, this is especially true for lower bitrates. I don't consider myself an expert, but 1,000 encodes and literally hundreds of comparisons over the last few years should at least allow me to voice the opinion that nothing can touch Procorder for encoding >interlaced< source. Even more expensive (around 2g's I think)is CCE SP, which again, IMSO, most experts clearly crown CCE's multipass VBR mode as the king for encoding progressive source.

But, saying all that, with the luxurious bitrates we now get to use for DVD, I doubt you could tell a whole hell of a lot of difference between Procorder, CCE and the MainConcept internal encoder. In fact, IMO, CCE can't do as good a job as the internal on interlaced source. The MC internal is really good, especially for the money. If you need to get down in the weeds like the 1800-3000 bitrate, I assure you, you would clearly see a difference between it and ProCorder, especially on interlaced DV source which is one of the most difficult encode jobs that exist. I think I literally spent a thousand hours testing every encoder I could get my hands on with DV source. It is VERY difficult to encode well at lower bitrates. I would conjecture that MC is second only to Canopus in that area.

So, to one of your other questions, yes you can encode to CCE but not the way you are used to doing it. Vegas would require you to render to an intermediate HD file, preferably lossless Huffy (huge) and then feed that to CCE directly or via avisynth if you need to apply filtering.

Anyway, there is a little more feedback for you (I couldn't sleep :-)). Just another opinion. I am biased about Vegas though, it is better than ice cream. :-) I just wish SoFo would smell the coffee about IPC. Maybe one day.