>> 4) 712 is not a multiple of 16. It is generally wise to choose
>> dimensions that are multiple of 16.
>
> To preserve as many lines of resolution as possible rather than cropping
> them. I'm aware this effects compressibility. Would it be "better" to
> scale it down to a multiple of 16 after cropping, then? Believe it or not,
> I was actually noticing the missing vertical resolution on some DVDs. It
> was a decision made during the encodefest as I examined output.
You'd best fiddle with resolution/dimensions as little as possible.
Every time you change the resolution, the quality gets worse, scaling is
a lossy process (if not scaled by exactly 2,4,1/2,1/4 etc.).
I'd recommend using the exact original DVD resolution, which also
happens to be nice at 16-pixel boundaries. And yes, that really helps
for encoding.
The only exception to this rule is if you have material that is
hard-letterboxed (i.e. has black borders in the movie itself, evil!),
I'd recommend to crop these off to a multiple of 16 pixels, and at
playback have the player re-add the borders when necessary (i.e. playing
on 4:3 equipment).
No comments:
Post a Comment