Forum Archive Home -> Advanced Video Conversion -> file duration in CCE

file duration in CCE

ecc posted 2008 Sep 15 05:48

Trying out CCE and I imported an AVS file of an AVI for conversion to MPEG2 and the running time is off by 6 seconds. The file runs 1:35:21 according to GSpot but CCE's main window says its 1:35:15. Importing the AVI file itself into CCE also reads as 1:35:15. The number of frames is the same. When I imported a 1:23:20 PAL AVI into CCE, I got a duration of 1:09:26 (number of frames was the same in GSpot and in CCE).

manono posted 2008 Sep 15 10:45

There's nothing wrong with your first one. The second one is off because 29.97fps is the default CCE framerate. If you set it to encode for 25fps the time should become correct. This assumes you do everything else correctly.

jagabo posted 2008 Sep 15 10:56

6 seconds is the difference between 29.97 fps and 30 fps over a 95 minute movie.

ecc posted 2008 Sep 15 13:33

Will the 23.976 ones encode correctly or do you have to go into the profile and change the framerate? This is why I like HCEnc, it sets its options based on the commands in the avs script and you don't have to do anything else other than set the DC and GOP. With TMPGE Xpress and MainConcept, it still asks you for the framerate and sizing and stuff even if they are included in the script and I guess you have to go in and adjust the profiles or create a new one in CCE to handle certain files.

manono posted 2008 Sep 15 14:31

: Will the 23.976 ones encode correctly or do you have to go into the profile and change the framerate? I think it's OK, but aren't you going into the main screen to check and adjust the settings anyway? For example, do you check to see if the "Progressive" box is checked, or if it's set for "Zig-Zag" scanning, or if Pulldown will be applied? Did you crop and resize in the script, or are you relying on CCE to do it for you? Me, I have a number of different templates I use for different kinds of video, with a progressive 23.976fps one set as the default, but there are still a number of things that have to be set in CCE, including bitrates, if 4:3 or 16:9 (sometimes), number of passes (sometimes), and quantisation matrix. : This is why I like HCEnc, it sets its options based on the commands in the avs script and you don't have to do anything else other than set the DC and GOP. I'm fairly certain you do more than that, unless you do every encode for the same bitrates or CQ, or DAR, or matrix. CCE is no more difficult to set up and use than is HCEnc.

ecc posted 2008 Sep 15 14:47

[quote]I'm fairly certain you do more than that, unless you do every encode for the same bitrates or CQ, or DAR, or matrix. CCE is no more difficult to set up and use than is HCEnc.[/quote] Yes, I do more than that but I guess the layout is more familiar and appealing to me than CCE's. The main interface of CCE seems like its geared for just dropping a file in and picking a preset. When I load a script into HCEnc, most of the settings are there (if its 23.976, it states it and recommends applying pulldown and the duration is correctly displayed). I set the bitrates and I'm still getting to know matrices. I've used the standard MPEG one and the FOX1.

manono posted 2008 Sep 15 15:25

ecc : ...but I guess the layout is more familiar and appealing to me than CCE's. That's interesting because I find the opposite, that CCE's is laid out better and is more intuitive. But that's probably because I'm more used to CCE, and use it more often than I do HCEnc. Both are fine encoders.

ecc posted 2008 Sep 15 21:49

[quote]That's interesting because I find the opposite, that CCE's is laid out better and is more intuitive. But that's probably because I'm more used to CCE, and use it more often than I do HCEnc. Both are fine encoders.[/quote] And I'm more used to HCEnc

45tripp posted 2008 Sep 15 22:06

yeah cce is built to be template based. but that's probably a good thing. it's nice the way you can drag input in and have a simple intuitive job manager on the main screen. those are essentially features missing from hc. I like the tab format of hc though. very clean. cce's layout is fine, it's as an encoder that i dislike it. speaking of layout... why do you have bbcodes disabled? and if you must or prefer, at least edit your posts to something more legible. tripp

ecc posted 2008 Sep 15 22:19

: speaking of layout... why do you have bbcodes disabled? I have no idea. I went to the profile and enabled it and re-entered the quote in the above post but it still looks like that but this new one seems to have been formatted correctly.

Login/Register to our forum to be able to post here.