Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)
Hi. I'm trying to crunch a 320x240 AVI -> MPEG-1 (or -2, if Beyond TV 3 will
handle that and it's better in some important way). It started life as a
recording which got damaged (I think by time starvation), so I went MPG ->
AVI (using VirtualDub), then AVI -> MPG (using TMPEGEnc). The AVI looks
fine, but the output MPEG is the input image (320x240) with a large black
surround (640x480 or maybe 800x600). What can I change to fix this?
On another note, after seeking within the MPEG there was a long delay before
playback would resume. I thought maybe this was due to my use of VBR, so I
changed TMPEGEnc to use CBR. I figure 1 GB/hr is sufficient; that should be
about 2330 kbit/s. Do my math and reasoning seem plausible?
--
-eben ebQenW1@EtaRmpTabYayU.rIr.OcoPm home.tampabay.rr.com/hactar
A: Because it looks dumb and is hard to read.
Q: Why is top-posting wrong? -- from lots42@xxx.com
Hi. I'm trying to crunch a 320x240 AVI -> MPEG-1 (or -2, if Beyond TV 3 will
handle that and it's better in some important way). It started life as a
recording which got damaged (I think by time starvation), so I went MPG ->
AVI (using VirtualDub), then AVI -> MPG (using TMPEGEnc). The AVI looks
fine, but the output MPEG is the input image (320x240) with a large black
surround (640x480 or maybe 800x600). What can I change to fix this?
On another note, after seeking within the MPEG there was a long delay before
playback would resume. I thought maybe this was due to my use of VBR, so I
changed TMPEGEnc to use CBR. I figure 1 GB/hr is sufficient; that should be
about 2330 kbit/s. Do my math and reasoning seem plausible?
--
-eben ebQenW1@EtaRmpTabYayU.rIr.OcoPm home.tampabay.rr.com/hactar
A: Because it looks dumb and is hard to read.
Q: Why is top-posting wrong? -- from lots42@xxx.com