Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (
More info?)
"PerthMETRO.net" <email -at- perthmetro -dot- net> wrote in message
news:Usenet.geglepqr@localhost...
> Ampersand wrote:
> >
> > <DeepOne@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> > news:VuJIc.5919$kK.2341@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > > "Ampersand" <ampersand@yourbestfriend.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >I need to encode some videos but I'd need to encode them at a low
> > > >bitrate (around VCD standard bitrate: 1150 kbps). Am I better off
> > > >encoding them
> > in
> > > >CBR or VBR? Given the fact that the bitrate will be low, there
> > > >might be
> > no
> > > >point in using VBR, but on the other hand, I thought that, using
> > > >the
> > latter,
> > > >quality can't be worse than using CBR. What do you all think?
> > > >Thanks!
> > >
> > > VBR is really only helpful with lower bitrates since it allows the
> > > bitrate to be increased for scenes which require it while decreasing
> > > the bitrate for scenes which don't. I would think that VBR might
> > > end up looking better (and almost certainly not worse) than CBR
> > > which is what you seem to be thinking. BTW, I hope you're using
> > > 352x240 (352x288 if PAL) resolution for these videos; the bitrate
> > > you're using is too low for higher DVD-compatible resolutions.
> > >
> >
> > That's right: I'm using low-resolution (352x240 NTSC) for my videos.
> > The problem is that I have converted my vids to DVD and I noticed
> > that some scenes were played at 600 kbps. I only wondered if there
> > could've been problems with my DVD player playing videos at such a
> > low bitrate.
>
> CBR should be more compatible
> --
>
> if I haven't given a url with my answer, try typing the keywords into
> www.google.com
>
Well, my DVD player plays VBR fine. I was only wondering if the parts of
the video that are played at 600 kbps might affect it (I thought this
bitrate was too low).
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram