No announcement yet.

Squeeze vs. ???

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Squeeze vs. ???

    Are Sorenson Squeeze 10 encodes to from HD to DVD any better than can be accomplished using the other methods commonly discussed such as TMPGEnc VMW or via Edius project settings change with Lanczos 3?

  • #2
    Trying the demo of Squeeze 10 and other export options, I see interesting (?) things.

    First starting with a short 1920x1080i HQ file as the source material, a marching band on a football field - lots of small object movement through about half the image. This was viewed from a DVD authored with TAW5, played on a Toshiba DVD recorder/player and then a Panasonic BD player both connected via HDMI to a Hitachi 32" TV, viewed from 18 inches. (Viewed from 8 feet the differences (except for the scaling effects) were not particularly noticeable to my aging eyes).

    Useed what are essentially the default setting to produce MTS elemental streams for DVD authoring, except that the TAW5 coding test started with the HQ file:

    TVMW5 and TAW5 produce essentially the same quality, with noticeable DCT ringing around moving object edges. They shrink the image portion of the video to 704x480 with black pillars at the sides to get to 720.

    E7 resizing with Lanczos3 shows no DCT ringing, but provided a softer image, 712x480 and narrow black pillars at the sides to get to 720.

    Squeeze showed a little less DTC ringing but (still clearly there) than TVMW5, and was the correct full size at 720x480.

    Have to try find my ProCoder3 copy and give it a test.


    • #3
      I can't say I have spent much time comparing this. What I do is export from EDIUS in HQX and than ll of my footage goes through Squeeze 10. I am happy and to be honest, it's 6 of one half a dozen of the other, many ways to do a good job and Squeeze is no "better" if that is the only question you are asking. The real benefit of Squeeze is for web video production and adaptive bit rates streaming, it kills in this area. - INVALUABLE


      • #4
        My "better" would mean sharp with fewer motion artifacts.

        The different actual image sizes were the surprise.