Mainconcept Mpeg Encoder 1.2 Standalone

[nasa]

hier mal ein Post aus dem Mainconcept support forum:

---------schnippel--------------------------------

I have just reviewed version 1.2
http://www.softdeko.8m.com/mainconcept_mpeg_encoder.htm
Please check http://www.MainConcept.com to see if the new version has been posted. Give it a couple of days and I'm sure it will be.

Improvements in version 1.2
- new DirectShow import module which fixes a lot of import problems
- new DV import which supports Type1 and RAW
- new import module dialog to change the priority of modules
- file split functionality on details page
- new scaling algorithm implemented (nicer)
- De-interlacing with top and bottom field (previous version has top only).
- De-interlacing now is done during scaling, while in the previous version this was done after scaling which sometimes results in bad quality
- default for DVD VBR ist 6MBit
- shut down after encoding implemented

With the new DirectShow import all known import problems are fixed, including
file size greater than 2GByte, some colour problems with DivX and Cinepack upside down.

I couldn't find a flaw... I'm sure one will turn up but I couldn't find one. Well done Thorsten and team.

Dafydd
@SoftDeko
http://www.softdeko.8m.com/
-----------schnippel---------------------------------

hört sich ja soweit ganz gut an - als registrierter anwender freut mich das umso mehr, da nun meinem Wunsch entsprochen wurde, eine Funktion zum automatischen abschalten des Rechners nach dem encoden einzubauen - hurraaa :-) keine extra soft mehr benötigt :-)

nasa

[shh]

[Dafydd@SoftDeko]

shh.

MainConcept haben nicht meinen Bericht "gekauft". Ich werde sehr an solch einer Aussage gestört.

Tatsache. Ich wiederhole Software, während sie zu SoftDeko kommt - ich nicht "brauche", einen guten Bericht zu geben. Das Produkt spricht für sich. Ich wählte Probleme in Version 1,1 aus und emailed mainconcept über sie - ich nicht krähen oder kreischen -, das ich im Finden einer Lösung unterstützte.

Was comparission anbetrifft das Mit.einbeziehen des MPEG-Kodierers MainConcept, TmpegEnc "prüft" und CCE - erhalten Sie real - ich nicht die Neigung haben, meinen gehenden Over der Zeit zu vergeuden der gleiche Boden andere getreten haben.

MainConcept ist schneller, verwendet eine andere kodierungsannäherung und ist verfluchtes gutes.

Dafydd
@SoftDeko

shh.

MainConcept have not "bought" my review. I am very annoyed at such a statement.

Fact. I review software as it comes to SoftDeko - I don't "need" to give a good review. The product speaks for itself. I picked out problems in version 1.1 and emailed mainconcept about them - I didn't crow or yell - I assisted in finding a solution

As for comparission "tests" involving MainConcept mpeg encoder, TmpegEnc and CCE - get real - I haven't the inclination to waste my time going over the same ground others have trod.

MainConcept is faster, uses a different encoding approach and is #### good.

Dafydd
@SoftDeko

[mb1]

Hi Dafydd, first welcome to the forum,

second is it possible to fix the pictures in your preview article.
I can't see a single picture.

As to my personal findings (tests with v1.1) mainconcept mpegencoder sharpens the images too strong which then produced heavy border noises.
I never did find any setting to eliminate this.

This is not an issue for procoder and cce and almost not for tmpeg.

Testmaterial was PAL DV material encoded to dvd bitrates (6.000 kbps avg, 8.000 kbps max).
You seemed to test DV material too.

I have tested different settings (including default of course) and could not produce material sufficient enough to pass my quality feelings.

Did you see improved picture quality from v1.1 to v1.2 ?
_________________
Grüße
mb1

Prophet Mohammed:
"Ein für den Wissenserwerb verbrachter Tag ist Gott lieber als 100 Kriege für Gott."

[Kika]

Die Bilder, die ich gefunden habe, scheinen aus 'ner Anleitung zu stammen. Sind jedenfalls verkleinerte Screenshoots vom Programm selbst. Erkennen kann man da nicht viel...


(Nicht verzagen, GetRight-Browser fragen, der findet solche Bilder trotzdem )

[Dafydd@SoftDeko]

mb1,

"Sahen Sie verbesserte Abbildungsqualität von v1.1 zu v1.2?", Wenn Sie soley zum MPEG refering, das dann ja ausgegeben wird, gibt es eine Qualitätsverbesserung.

Wenn Sie die Farbenverzerrung DivX in 1,1 oder auf die Unfähigkeit sich beziehen zu kodieren, ist DivX in 1,0 dann Version 1,2 ausgezeichnet!

Wenn Sie auf die Geschicklichkeit der Version 1,1 eine Cinepak kodierte aviaktenoberseite unten von drehen und von Kodierung sie so in ein MPEG sich beziehen. Ja hat es ziemlich viel von der Verbesserung gegeben.

Ich führe nicht die Vergleichsprüfung durch - ich überlasse dem Sie.

Ich habe einige gute Reports über den MPEG-Kodierer Puremotion - wert das Versuchen dieses aus möglicherweise gehört.

Dafydd
@SoftDeko .
Prüfung http://www.softdeko.8m.com/latestupdates.htm - 10 Softwarepakete für Mitglieder SoftDeko.

mb1,

"Did you see improved picture quality from v1.1 to v1.2?" If you're refering soley to the mpeg out-put then yes there is a quality improvement.

If you're referring to the DivX colour distortion in 1.1 or the inability to encode DivX in 1.0 then version 1.2 is magnificent!

If you're referring to the version 1.1 knack of turning a Cinepak encoded avi file upside down and encoding it that way into an mpeg. Yes, there has been a good deal of improvement.

I wont carry out comparison testing - I'll leave that to you.

I've heard some good reports on the Puremotion mpeg encoder - worth trying that one out perhaps.

Dafydd
@SoftDeko.

Checkout http://www.softdeko.8m.com/latestupdates.htm - 10 software packages for SoftDeko Members.

[Dafydd@SoftDeko]

mb1

re: Ihr Problem mit den Bildern.

Dieses bezieht Ihren Computereinstellungen mit ein und Gewährenbilder innen von anderen websites. Die Bilder SoftDeko im des MPEG-Kodierers 1,2 MainConcept Bericht werden auf einem anderen SoftDeko gehandhabten website gespeichert.

Wiederholen Sie Ihre Bildsicherheitseinstellungen und SieSIND in der Lage, die Bilder anzusehen!

Dafydd
@SoftDeko

http://www.SoftDeko.8m.com/latestupdates.htm

mb1,

Re: Your problem with the images.

This has to do with your computer settings and allowing images in from other websites. The SoftDeko images in the MainConcept Mpeg encoder 1.2 review are stored on another SoftDeko managed website.

Review your image security settings and you'll be able to view the images!

Dafydd
@SoftDeko

http://www.SoftDeko.8m.com/latestupdates.htm

[shh]

In Fact, many small web-sites get payed by the companies, to stay alife. If you or SoftDeko doesn't, just forget about that - It was just a suggestion.

[Dafydd@SoftDeko]

shh,

Barbed and assuming!

So you want me to carry out a comparison test to justify giving an easy to use software 97.5%. A software that does what it's suppose to, render to a DVD, VCD or SVCD, produces results that don't involve a triple or a double pass!!!! MainConcept's encoder has been selected by Adobe, ulead Sonic Foundry to name just three!!!

That would mean looking at Tmpeg, ($49) a program that has had more updates that you've had hot dinners and compare it to a program like Cinema Craft Encoder SP sells for $1,950.00 US Dollars and reach some fancifull conclusion. Are you one of those with a pirated version of CCE? (http://63.79.142.57/mall/products/cinemacraft/CCESP.asp

http://www.cinemacraft.com/eng/purchase.html

http://www.cinemacraft.com/eng/contact.html

I'm actually looking at MainConcept Mpeg Encoder 1.2 ($149)software from a users prospective - and giving it an appraisal from that point of view.

To give a thorough appraisal of a software would involve carrying out comparison tests on all encoding software and even hardware encoders to compare the end results, As well as seeing if that software gave "value for money". If you want to carry out that sort of task - go ahead. I for one have better things to do with my time.

Price wise, User friendly, Value for Money, end result - MainConcept comes out a winner.

Of course this is my opinion - and you have yours

Dafydd
@SoftDeko

[Dafydd@SoftDeko]

Shh

Mit Stacheln versehen und anmaßend!

So wünschen Sie mich einen Vergleichstest durchführen, um sich ein, einfaches zu geben zu rechtfertigen, Software 97,5% zu benutzen. Eine Software, die tut, was es ist, nehmen zu, übertragen zu einem DVD, VCD an, oder SVCD, produziert Resultate, die nicht eine Dreiergruppe oder einen doppelten Durchlauf!!! miteinbeziehen! Kodierer MainConcepts ist von Adobe, uleadschallgießerei vorgewählt worden, gerade drei zu nennen!!!

Das würde das Betrachten von Tmpeg, ($49) ein Programm, das mehr Updates gehabt hat, als Sie, heiße zu Abend gegessen zu haben bedeuten und es mit einem Programm wie Kinofertigkeit-Kodierer-SP zu vergleichen für $1.950,00 US-Dollar verkauft und irgendeine fancifullzusammenfassung erreicht. Sind Sie eins von denen mit einer pirated Version von CCE? (http://63.79.142.57/mall/products/cinemacraft/CCESP.asp http://www.cinemacraft.com/eng/purchase.html http://www.cinemacraft.com/eng/contact.html

Betrachte ich wirklich MPEG-Kodierer 1,2 ($149)software MainConcept von die Benutzer zukünftig - und ihm eine Schätzung von diesem Gesichtspunkt gebend. eine vollständige Schätzung einer Software zu geben würde miteinbeziehen, Vergleichstests auf aller kodierensoftware und sogar Kleinteilkodierern durchzuführen, um zu vergleichen die Endenresultate, sowie das Sehen, wenn diese Software "Wert für Geld" gab. Wenn Sie durchführen möchten daß Art der Aufgabe - gehen Sie voran. I für ein haben die besseren Sachen zum Tun mit meiner Zeit.

Setzen Sie für Preis kluges fest, benutzerfreundlich, Wert für Geld, Endenresultat - MainConcept kommt aus einem Sieger.

Selbstverständlich ist dieses meine Meinung - und Sie haben Ihre

Dafydd
@SoftDeko

[shh]

> So you want me to carry out a comparison test to justify giving an easy to use software 97.5%

No way! Do what you like with your time.
But, you'll then you have to learn how to cope with criticism about your reviews, which show only one point of view.

> MainConcept's encoder has been selected by Adobe, ulead Sonic Foundry to name just three!!!

OH my god!!! Now I'm really impressed!!! :0

Perhaps everyone should review it your way. Life would be much easier.
- Do just one test of one category.
- Just read the changes-log of the program.
- Don't compare with competitors when trying to assess...
[sarcasm]
Perhaps something like that would come:
Review of an Operating-System: 97.5%
Wow! With this Win95 I can do everything, and quite well.
Price wise, User friendly, Value for Money, end result - Win95 comes out a winner.
Review of a SVCD-Authoring-Soft: 97.5%
Wow! Just drag your AVI into Nero, and everything is done on the fly. Very good quality of the MPEG btw. (I did't look at competitors because of lack of time...)
Review of a CD-ROM: 97.5%
Wow! This drive is quite fast! 12 times of the standard-speed, and reads CD, CD-R, CD-RW, AudioCD, ... And from the users point of view it's very cheap (take a look at eBay). Pricewice, and featurewise it shurely is the winner.
[/sarcasm]

> from a users prospective

I'm very sorry, for not taking your review serious, but if you had encoded some time longer, or checked out some competitors, you would have come to a way different result.
And that's what users actually want to know: What is really good and what not. Decide that for them before testing for a long time and without seriously comparing with other software - it's impossible. ;)

Cheers,
shh
_________________
shh >>> shh's MPEG-tools

[Dafydd@SoftDeko]

shh,

Well are you using an illegally obtained CCE encoder or is your avoidance of the question merely an oversight?

I'm fine about constructive criticism.

re the point about Adobe, Ulead, and Sonic Foundry - they are using an earlier version of the MC encoder but they're basically bringing an affordable product to the PAYING consumer. there selection of the encoder didn't really influence me - I just mentioned them in passing.

You may well sing the praises of CCE but I doubt the vast majority will purchase it and would opt for a lesser priced product.

You may want to carry out selective comparison test but I doubt that people will buy CCE in vast numbers. As for the Tmpeg Encoder being the other option espoused by reports - fine.

If you have obtained the CCE encoder leagally please contact the address in my earlier posting and confirm your name address and the serial number.

As for ridiculing the 97.5 - go ahead you can continue to dot your "i's" behind a psuedonym and lambast others.

Your initial statements in these postings were based on inaccuracies, followed by further wrong assertions. At least I'm the one to have tried out MC Mpeg Encoder 1.2 pre-release and have contributed to improvement. You on the other hand have little to no involvement with the progress of CCE or TmpegEnc.

So sit down and contribute

Dafydd
@SoftDeko

[Dafydd@SoftDeko]

shh,

Brunnen benutzen Sie einen illegal erreichten CCE-Kodierer, oder ist Ihre Vermeidung der Frage bloß eine Aufsicht?

Ich bin fein über konstruktive Kritik.

bezüglich des Punktes über luftgetrockneten Ziegelstein, Ulead und Schallgießerei - sie verwenden eine frühere Version des MCKODIERERS, aber sie holen im Allgemeinen ein erschwingliches Produkt zur ZAHLENDEN des Verbrauchers Vorwähler dort des Kodierers nicht beeinflußten mich wirklich - ich erwähnte sie gerade beim Überschreiten.

Sie können hervorquellen singen die Lobe von CCE, aber ich zweifele, daß die beträchtliche Majorität ihn kauft und für kleiner veranschlagtes Produkt entscheiden würde.

Sie können vorgewählten Vergleichstest durchführen wünschen, aber ich bezweifele, daß Leute CCE in den beträchtlichen Zahlen kaufen. Als für den Kodierer Tmpeg, der die andere Wahl ist, espoused durch die feinen Reports -.

Wenn Sie den CCE-Kodierer gefallen leagally Kontakt die Adresse in meiner früheren Eintragung erreicht haben und bestätigen Sie Ihr Namens wenden und die Seriennummer.

Was das Ridiculing anbetrifft die 97,5 - gehen voran Sie können fortfahren, Ihre "i" hinter einem psuedonym und einem lambast zu punktieren andere.

Ihre Ausgangsaussagen in diesen postings basierten auf den Ungenauigkeiten, gefolgt von den weiteren falschen Behauptungen. Mindestens ich bin der zum Haben ausprobierten MC-MPEG-Kodierer 1,2 vor-freigebe und habe beigetragen zur Verbesserung. Sie haben andererseits wenig zu keiner Miteinbeziehung mit dem Fortschritt von CCE oder von TmpegEnc.

Sitzen Sie so hin und tragen Sie

Dafydd
@SoftDeko

[mosher2k]

also diese englisch-deutsch übersetzungen sind ja grauenvoll.
muss dat denn sein - die meisten Leser hier sind ja vermutlich eh des englischen mächtig und beim lesen dieser übersetzungen wird einem ganz grün vor augen.
muss man den text von hinten nach vorne lesen oder die worte nach dem zufallsprinzip ordnen ?

Gruss,
Mosher2k

[cityhawkxxl]

Wüßte gerne worum es hier geht ?



MFG
CITY
_________________
Epox 8K5A3+
AMD 2800+
1024 MB DDR (333)
4 x Maxtor 120 GB
Geforce 2 TI
Vidac Movie + Plugin
HPT 374
6.1 Sound VIA
Plextor 48/24/48
Pioneer A04
Liteon 165
HP 980 Duplex

[shh]

> Well are you using an illegally obtained CCE encoder or is your avoidance of the question merely an oversight?
> You may well sing the praises of CCE but ...

I'm intentionally ignoring this imputation, because it isn't relevant. I don't see, where you want to lead this discussion.
I just mentioned CCE as a competitor, btw, I don't see where my praises started...

You seem to constantly ignore all other competitors which are cheap, too, and produce excellent quality (like TMPGEnc, Ligos GoMotion).
Furthermore you ignore, that CinemaCraft is releasing demo-versions of their software which are quite fine for testing. Many companies are that accommodating, to give full versions to reviewers, too btw. You could have asked.

> the point about Adobe, Ulead, and Sonic Foundry
> there selection of the encoder didn't really influence me - I just mentioned them in passing

You took that as an argument for your achievements. Perhaps because your arguments are running out.

Again, you have bounded your test that far, that only a few pieces have left. Then you ignored the other products which produce same quality for partly less money.
Then you gave MC a perfect rating....
Absolutely useless for a user, who wants to invest reasonable.

Your insisting on your point of view makes me again think, that you have never taken a look at other encoders.
You don't even abctract your opinion.

> You on the other hand have little to no involvement with the progress of CCE or TmpegEnc

I'm sorry, but what makes you think so?

> So sit down and contribute

Oh, please.
Ask some otherone how and how often we contribute to that encoders, others and other products around video-processing. We just don't tell everyone and make it our great achievement when pointing bugs out and send emails to the companies.

> Your initial statements in these postings were based on inaccuracies, followed by further wrong assertions

My initial statements are proving more and more to be true.
That are the reviews we have to fight against daily, because they misleaded many people and our board (and many others) has to correct much of their ignorance.
All that, because reviewers don't investigate or investigate too less.

Cheers,
shh
_________________
shh >>> shh's MPEG-tools

[Dafydd@SoftDeko]

I repeat the request - contact CCE and give your name address and serial number - they'll be most interested.

Any implication can be read in the response you made!

I don't need to justify what other encoders are capable of to write a review on one product. Whether its Mainconcept, Pinnacle Systems, Ligos, Cyberlink, Puremotion, Tmpeg, CCE or anything else to name just a few!

The readers of this Forum should be quite capable of trying out MCMpegEnc software for themselves even comparing them with other demos. The MainConcept Encoder Demo is fully functioning even after 30 days - it just watermarks the resulting mpeg files.

The TmpegEnc Plus has a 14day restriction, the Free vesion has a 30 day Mpeg2 restriction..

The CCE has a $1950 price tag.

For a $149 program the MainConcept encoder does give value for money, does produce excellent results.

I've enjoyed responding to your posts "shh" whoever you are and I can see where you're coming from - wanting to use the "best". Unfortunately we have a differing opinion of what that is and what can be afforded by the many.

I don't consider I have won or lost an "argument" since you're in "hiding" behind a fascade.

Hwyl fawr - that just means a "great goodbye/farewell"

Dafydd
@SoftDeko

[bergH]

Hello !

@Dafydd@SoftDeko
Please allow some side remarks :

- Please do not use your translator any more PLEASE.
I am sitting here laughing my ass off because of the
nonsense produced. In the literally sense of the word:
non-sense.
E.G.
Adobe = air dryed brick(English meaning of the translation produced)
sit down and contribute = sit down and carry (something)

- The people you are dicussing with (SHH & MB1) are,
well known here in Germany, as some of the best encoder
testers I have every talked with. I can state that the group
here in this board contributes to the development of
encoders more than any other Board/Group I know.

If they tell you something you better listen.

- Despite the fact that I am a Mod here I am more a
"user who wants result" type of guy.
The thing what also disturbs me really is that a
comparison is missing.
As a TMPGENc Fan at least a comparison in this price
category in my eyes is reasonable.

Back to main topic. ;)
_________________
Gruß BergH

[shh]

> I repeat the request - contact CCE and give your name address and serial number - they'll be most interested.

Interested in what?
I don't have a full version of the encoder, just a demo-version. I already said, that it is completely fine for testing purposes. Your clip wasn't longer than CCE's encoding-restriction, btw.

> I don't need to justify

Of course you don't.
But learn how to cope with criticism.
Instead of the price, none of your arguments are substantial.
If one wants to evaluate something, one should not just look at it's price, but also for the quality and functions per price. Since you didn't compare with other products, how can you tell what's good and what not?
The tests we made with the many encoders, many versions, different inputs, matrix-optimizing and so on are that huge, that it cannot be stuffed here as an inline argument.
Well, you call that "hiding behind a fassade"... nothing to comment.
If you want to learn something about encoders, just feel free to ask something specific and get funded answers from us.

Cheers,
shh

p.s.
Uuups.... BergH has come between my answer.
_________________
shh >>> shh's MPEG-tools

[nasa]

herrjehhh wie im kindergarten.

was solls. ich hab den mainconcept registrieren lassen weil kurz, knapp, bündig und schneller als tmpeg (hab ich ja auch registriert).
Manche dinge sind am tmpeg einfach besser (direktes öffnen von d2v files z.b.) die geschwindigkeit aber dem mainconcept unterlegen.

Sofern mann (frau) nicht ein totaler qualitätsfanatiker ist, ist der Mainconcept sicher eine gute mischung zwischen qualität und geschwindigkeit.

So hat halt jeder von uns so seine vorstellungen. Mir reicht er im Gespann mit Tmpeg dicke.

warum muss man sich da immer gleich auf den schlipps getreten fühlen, wenn mal einer ein wenig kritik äussert.

gruss an alle nörgler :-)

nasa