TmpGEnc AVI Files Seem WAY Too Large

"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt.net> wrote in message
news:5ac3dbF2maijtU1@mid.individual.net...

> "Martin" wrote ...

>>I wish to import some MPEG-2 files into Windows Moviemaker. Because
>> the problems with Moviemaker and MPEG-2 are well-documented, I decided
>> to use TmpGEnc to convert to uncompressed AVI as an intermediate
>> format acceptable to Moviemaker.
>>
>> The source files are from a JVC Everio camcorder. This device writes
>> MPEG-2 files and tags them with a .MOD extension, which TmpGEnc does
>> not accept, but I found that all I had to do was change the extension
>> to .MPG and that problem disappears.
>>
>> My question is the file size - the output AVI files are, on average,
>> about 1.5 Gigabytes per minute. Does this seem reasonable, and in
>> line with what an uncompressed AVI file should be? I know that mini-
>> DV files, which are not heavily compressed, are about 12 or 13 GB per
>> hour, or about 200 MB per minute. If uncompressed AVI is really
>> supposed to be 1.5 GB per minute, this would imply that mini-DV is
>> already compressed about 7:1, which I find hard to believe.

>
> DV25 (including "mini-DV", Digital8, DV, DVcam and DVCpro25) runs
> at 25Mbps = 13.7 GB/hour. DV25 is spatially compressed 5:1 in the
> camera but has no temporal compression (like many/most forms
> of MPEG do).
>
> 1 Second = 3.5 MB
> 1 Minute = 215 MB
> 4 Minutes, 40 Seconds = 1 GB
> 1 Hour = 13 GB
>
> http://people.csail.mit.edu/tbuehler/video/dv.html
>
> Your rate of 1.5GB/minute is *way more* than even uncompressed
> standard-definition television (NTSC or PAL). Sounds like something
> is seriously screwed up with your configuration.
>
> Remember that "AVI" is a container file and tells you nothing about
> what is inside (i.e. which codec and parameters were used to encode
> the video). Saying that you are trying to read an AVI file is like saying
> that you are having Tupperware for dinner.
>
> So what exactly are the output settings you are using with TmpGEnc?
>

It's much easier to just use a MPEG Editor to edit MPEG.
http://www.ulead.com/vs/sysreq.htm

If that is too pedestrian for you then try Avid's Liquid.

Luck
Ken

On 8 May 2007 12:31:46 -0700, in 'rec.video.desktop',
in article <TmpGEnc AVI Files Seem WAY Too Large>,
Martin <funkychateauSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I wish to import some MPEG-2 files into Windows Moviemaker. Because
>the problems with Moviemaker and MPEG-2 are well-documented, I decided
>to use TmpGEnc to convert to uncompressed AVI as an intermediate
>format acceptable to Moviemaker.

Okay.

>The source files are from a JVC Everio camcorder. This device writes
>MPEG-2 files and tags them with a .MOD extension, which TmpGEnc does
>not accept, but I found that all I had to do was change the extension
>to .MPG and that problem disappears.

Great.

>My question is the file size - the output AVI files are, on average,
>about 1.5 Gigabytes per minute. Does this seem reasonable, and in
>line with what an uncompressed AVI file should be?

I can't answer that without knowing the technical characteristics
(frame rate, frame size, color depth, audio type, etc.) of the .avi
file that you've created.

I have uncompressed .avi files with frame sizes of 80 by 60, frame
rates of 10 frames per second, and no audio track. I can assure you
that these files do not consume 1.5 GB per minute of storage space.

Here's an example that's perhaps closer to what you're dealing with: I
often work with hour-long (give or take a few minutes) uncompressed
..avi files having the following characteristics - 640 by 480 frame
size with square pixels, interlaced at 59.94 fields per second, 8-bit
RGB 4:4:4 color depth, and with 2-channel (stereo), 16-bit, 48 kHz
non-compressed LPCM audio. These files run about 100 GB per hour in
size, give or take a few gigs. If I run one of these 100 GB files
through a lossless compression algorithm such as HuffYUV or Lagarith,
the file size drops to about 50 GB, representing a 50 percent
reduction in the storage requirement but with no loss of visual
quality. If you have a space problem, and who doesn't, you might want
to consider use of a lossless video codec.

>I know that mini-
>DV files, which are not heavily compressed, are about 12 or 13 GB per
>hour, or about 200 MB per minute. If uncompressed AVI is really
>supposed to be 1.5 GB per minute, this would imply that mini-DV is
>already compressed about 7:1, which I find hard to believe.

NTSC DV is indeed compressed at a 5 to 1 ratio but that's after 4:1:1
chroma decimation has been applied, so some people refer to DV as
having a real compression (or data reduction) ratio that's actually
closer to 7 to 1. I've never taken the time to sit down with a
calculator to confirm or deny the 7:1 figure, but certainly if you
take the 4:1:1 color reduction into account, the overall compression
ratio is more than 5:1, especially compared to a 4:4:4 signal, even
one with only 8-bit color.

>thanks and regards,

HTH.

>Martin

--
Frank, Independent Consultant, New York, NY
[Please remove 'nojunkmail.' from address to reply via e-mail.]
Read Frank's thoughts on HDV at http://www.humanvalues.net/hdv/

"Frank" wrote ...

> NTSC DV is indeed compressed at a 5 to 1 ratio but that's after 4:1:1
> chroma decimation has been applied,

And 4:2:0 chroma decimation for PAL

On Tue, 8 May 2007 16:11:33 -0700, in 'rec.video.desktop',
in article <Re: TmpGEnc AVI Files Seem WAY Too Large>,
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt.net> wrote:

>"Frank" wrote ...

>> NTSC DV is indeed compressed at a 5 to 1 ratio but that's after 4:1:1
>> chroma decimation has been applied,

>
>And 4:2:0 chroma decimation for PAL

Correct, DV25 is 4:2:0 in PAL-land, which is specifically why I wrote
a qualified "NTSC DV" rather than just "DV" or "DV25".

4:1:1 color sampling and 4:2:0 color sampling both store the same
amount of color information, it's just sampled in a different manner.

Of course, we don't know where the OP is located and exactly what kind
of .avi file he created. Personally, I don't think that his "1.5 GB
per minute" figure is far off, however, but lacking further
information, I can't really say. Even if he's in NTSC-land, I don't
even know whether he's dealing with square pixel 640 by 480 footage or
non-square pixel 720 by 480 footage, for example.

--
Frank, Independent Consultant, New York, NY
[Please remove 'nojunkmail.' from address to reply via e-mail.]
Read Frank's thoughts on HDV at http://www.humanvalues.net/hdv/

"Frank" <frank@nojunkmail.humanvalues.net> wrote in message
news:k51243le71mpg9aru3iqu8ri8je2h22458@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 8 May 2007 16:11:33 -0700, in 'rec.video.desktop',
> in article <Re: TmpGEnc AVI Files Seem WAY Too Large>,
> "Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt.net> wrote:
>

>>"Frank" wrote ...

>>> NTSC DV is indeed compressed at a 5 to 1 ratio but that's after 4:1:1
>>> chroma decimation has been applied,

>>
>>And 4:2:0 chroma decimation for PAL

>
>
> Correct, DV25 is 4:2:0 in PAL-land, which is specifically why I wrote
> a qualified "NTSC DV" rather than just "DV" or "DV25".
>
> 4:1:1 color sampling and 4:2:0 color sampling both store the same
> amount of color information, it's just sampled in a different manner.
>
> Of course, we don't know where the OP is located and exactly what kind
> of .avi file he created. Personally, I don't think that his "1.5 GB
> per minute" figure is far off, however, but lacking further
> information, I can't really say. Even if he's in NTSC-land, I don't
> even know whether he's dealing with square pixel 640 by 480 footage or
> non-square pixel 720 by 480 footage, for example.
>
> --
> Frank, Independent Consultant, New York, NY
> [Please remove 'nojunkmail.' from address to reply via e-mail.]
> Read Frank's thoughts on HDV at http://www.humanvalues.net/hdv/

Since I doubt there is any thing MS MovieMaker can do that
Ulead Video Studio 11 can't, I don't see why anyone would
be advising converting from the editable .mpg/.mod format to
a DV-AVI format, for editing in MS MM2.
(With apologies to the Moviemaker NewsGroup.)

If it were a matter of needing to use free software, there are a
number of programs that can read MPEG2 MP/HL video and
output AVI (DV-AVI with the codec). I would start with
VirtualDubMod myself.

But if I had such a camera, it would make sense to spend some
on editing software that could make it much easier to produce
the video results I bought the camera for. Without going through
time and potentially quality robbing conversion steps. I doubt
anyone buys a JVC Everio, as a professional production camera.
(Nor, were that the case, that MS MovieMaker would be the
preferred editing package. Apologies, again.)

The advantages of such a camera are more to a quick product
cycle, and ease of production for personal/home use. Besides
"Home Movies"/DVDs it should lend itself to a number of training
and event video productions that require a very rapid development
of distribution video.

Luck;
Ken

On Tue, 8 May 2007 20:10:12 -0500, in 'rec.video.desktop',
in article <Re: TmpGEnc AVI Files Seem WAY Too Large>,
"Ken Maltby" <kmaltby@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>Since I doubt there is any thing MS MovieMaker can do that
>Ulead Video Studio 11 can't,

I'm sure that there isn't, at least not much, anyway.

>I don't see why anyone would
>be advising converting from the editable .mpg/.mod format to
>a DV-AVI format, for editing in MS MM2.

The OP wrote, "Because the problems with Moviemaker and MPEG-2 are
well-documented, I decided to use TmpGEnc to convert to uncompressed
AVI as an intermediate format acceptable to Moviemaker."

Apparently the OP decided upon this course of action on his own. I
certainly don't see anyone here advising him to transcode from one
lossy compressed format to another lossy compressed format (MPEG-2 to
DV-AVI as you've stated). Of course this thread is cross-posted to
microsoft.public.windowsxp.moviemaker and rec.video.desktop and since
I'm only reading it in rec.video.desktop, someone made have made a
suggestion that I missed.

As far as taking the lossy compressed MPEG-2 original and saving it
out as an uncompressed .avi is concerned, that's a perfectly good
thing to do if you've got the disk space, and it's a lossless process,
the loss having occurred back in the camcorder when the images were
shot and lossy compressed by the camcorder into MPEG-2 format.

In fact, if he keeps the footage in uncompressed format throughout the
editing process and saves the final result of his editing as an
uncompressed file, he's then got an uncompressed master file that can
be used to encode to any of a zillion different formats/codecs --
everything from RealVideo to Windows Media Video to an H.264/AVC file
for his iPod or PSP. Let the additional loss occur then.

Of course, if he's doing cuts-only editing with no transitions, fades,
wipes, color correction, titles, etc., then it makes sense to edit in
the native format, MPEG-2 in this case.

>(With apologies to the Moviemaker NewsGroup.)
>
> If it were a matter of needing to use free software, there are a
>number of programs that can read MPEG2 MP/HL video and
>output AVI (DV-AVI with the codec). I would start with
>VirtualDubMod myself.
>
> But if I had such a camera, it would make sense to spend some
>on editing software that could make it much easier to produce
>the video results I bought the camera for. Without going through
>time and potentially quality robbing conversion steps. I doubt
>anyone buys a JVC Everio, as a professional production camera.
>(Nor, were that the case, that MS MovieMaker would be the
>preferred editing package. Apologies, again.)
>
> The advantages of such a camera are more to a quick product
>cycle, and ease of production for personal/home use. Besides
>"Home Movies"/DVDs it should lend itself to a number of training
>and event video productions that require a very rapid development
>of distribution video.
>
>Luck;
> Ken

--
Frank, Independent Consultant, New York, NY
[Please remove 'nojunkmail.' from address to reply via e-mail.]
Read Frank's thoughts on HDV at http://www.humanvalues.net/hdv/

In rec.video.desktop Richard Crowley <rcrowley@xp7rt.net> wrote:
: Your rate of 1.5GB/minute is *way more* than even uncompressed
: standard-definition television (NTSC or PAL). Sounds like something
: is seriously screwed up with your configuration.

Actually, rates of 1.5G/minute ARE common for uncompressed .avi files
if you don't use a codec. For example, if you take a DV file and load
it into Virtualdub, but don't specify a codec, that is exactly what you get.

Sometimes I find myself doing this temporarily if I'm mixing Virtualdub
and Vegas. Vegas has its own codec that can't be loaded into Virtualdub,
so at times I'll just go ahead and load a Vegas-produced .avi file into
virtualdub and after running a filter I get humongous-sized files. Of
course, I then load them back into Vegas and let it use its codec to
bring it back down to normal size. (I know that I could use HuffyYUV
codec in both, but it's only temporary and so far it hasn't been an issue
so I haven't gotten around to it.)

Sounds like for some reason your setup isn't utilizing a codec.

"Frank" <frank@nojunkmail.humanvalues.net> wrote in message
news:2ia24311krtqhgspjohj0mjmip26ofepsb@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 8 May 2007 20:10:12 -0500, in 'rec.video.desktop',
> in article <Re: TmpGEnc AVI Files Seem WAY Too Large>,
>
> Of course, if he's doing cuts-only editing with no transitions, fades,
> wipes, color correction, titles, etc., then it makes sense to edit in
> the native format, MPEG-2 in this case.
>

You should know by now that an MPEG editor like the
Ulead VideoStudio 11 I mentioned can do all those things
and many more, in native MPEG editing. Every thing
except the color correction will even be done with smart
rendering, a very fast process that only processes the
portion of the video impacted by the effect being applied.

But you should know all this, you are familiar with a number
of editors that can natively edit MPEG many like Avid Liquid
and other more expensive programs are used professionally,
to edit HDV (MPEG 2).

Some of the Womble products have been applying titles, fades,
wipes, and transitions to DVD compliant MPEG 2 for a very
long time now, several years at least.

Don't tell me you have bought into Crowley's MPEG phobia?

There is no need to put the perfectly editable MPEG2 through
several unnecessary time consuming conversions. There are
plenty of encoders that will create the file types you mention,
from MPEG2 input. That is certainly the case for H.264.
It would be odd, wouldn't it, if all the HDV (MPEG2) video,
couldn't be converted/encoded to any other format. You know
better.

Luck;
Ken