[vox-tech] wincast tv: video4linux and copying movies

[Jonathan Stickel]

Pete

I have studied this a little, but for the purpose of ripping DVDs rather 
than capturing input from VHS or television.  I was overwhelmed by all 
the options.  In addition to what you discovered and what Mark details, 
there are other "video codecs" (e.g. XviD seems to be popular), "audio 
codecs" (AC3, mp2, mp3, Vorbis), and "containers" for the final output 
(AVI, OGG, VOB, VCD, SVCD, ...).  It makes a big difference whether you 
just want to watch it on your computer or if you want to use a 
stand-alone DVD player.

Although specifically for ripping DVDs, you might find these 2 sites 
useful as they describe many of the general concepts:

http://www.exit1.org/dvdrip/
http://www.bunkus.org/dvdripping4linux/en/separate/index.html#toc

Good luck!  I'll be looking to see what format you end up using.

Jonathan


Mark K. Kim wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 p@dirac.org wrote:
> 
> 
>>sam, just so i have some extra lingo, what are some other "container
>>formats" besides AVI?
> 
> 
> Quicktime can also store video/audio in various codecs.  Not sure if the
> "generic" format lets you store in a noncompressed codec but probably.
> 
> 
>>and what's the difference between MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 which ryan
>>suggested?  are the "-2" and "-4" what people call "layer", as in "mpeg
>>layer 3"?  so is MPEG both an audio and a video encoding scheme?
> 
> 
> MPEG2 and MPEG4 is different than MP3.  MPEG2 and MPEG4 are for both audio
> and video.  MP3 is only the audio subcomponent of MPEG2 (layer 3 of
> MPEG2.)  There's no such thing as MPEG3 because the MPEG3 standard was
> scrapped before it was completed.
> 
> MPEG2 is used on DVDs.  MPEG4, by far, has better compression.  If you
> wanna fit 1 hour+ of video on a CD, use MPEG4.
> 
> 
>>it looks like this process is similar to making mp3's.  first you rip,
>>then you encode.  probably because, as ryan pointed out, encoding is an
>>expensive process.  so here is what i gather from everybody's replies:
> 
> 
> yep.
> 
> 
>>1. it looks like i have a few choices for ripping to disk:
>>
>>   mplayer
>>   xawtv
>>   nuppelvideo
>>   mjpegtools
> 
> 
> I've had a hard time getting TV signal on mplayer because you gotta set
> the channels and such by setting the frequencies which is just a hassle to
> fiddle with.  But I'm sure it's doable.  xawtv is a much easier to use,
> though, since you use it to view TV channels anyway, and you get a menu
> for saving the video.
> 
> I haven't used nuppelvideo or mjpegtools.  I've never heard of nuppelvideo
> and I didn't know mjpegtools lets you save video from v4l devices.
> 
> 
>>2. and a few choices for encoding:
>>
>>   mencoder (part of mplayer distribution)
>>   mjpegtools
>>   ffmpeg
>>   transcode
> 
> 
> I highly recommend mencoder because it lets you use virtually any codec it
> understands (virtually everything out there) to record.  So you get a lot
> of choices, which usually means you can pick the best codec available.
> Others seem to let you encode only in MPEG1 or 2, if it offers you any
> choice at all.
> 
> 
>>3. between ripping and encoding, ryan gave a suggestion on basic editing
>>   like cutting out commercials or "upcoming attractions" of movies that
>>   were released 5 years ago (i hate the fact that they put upcoming
>>   attraction on videos that i purchase).  a few is ok, but sometimes
>>   they really let it get out of hand).
>>
>>   avidemux
> 
> 
> It's a good idea but a lot of hassle, I think.  If you can script it, more
> power to ya.  mpgtx also lets you chop/split/join mpeg1 videos but you'll
> probably lose some quality since you'd need to encode it to mpeg1 before
> recoding it to mpeg4.
> 
> 
>>also, sometimes i see people write "DivX ;-)".  what exactly does that
>>smiley face mean?  and what exactly is DivX anyhow?
> 
> 
> "DivX ;-)" is the name of the codec.  They changed the name to "DivX"
> a while ago, though.  "Divx", of course, was that proprietary Circuit City
> DVD format that died a long time ago, and "DivX ;-)" was a name making fun
> of it... now that "DivX ;-)" changed its name, it can be a little
> confusing to talk about the Circuit City's DVD format without getting it
> confused with "DviX ;-)" but that's life.
> 
> DivX's compression is definitely better than MPEG2.  And somehow MPEG4 and
> DivX is related but I'm not exactly sure how.  They seem to either share
> compression techniques or have the ability to embed one format in the
> other, or it's just a different name for the same thing -- I'm not sure.
> Anyway, MPEG4 and DivX are very comparable and a video made in one format
> seems to be playable in a player that understands the other format.
> 
> -Mark
>