PDA

View Full Version : DVD archiving


_leech_
27th June 2007, 07:06
I'm looking into backing up my DVDs with AVC. Not looking to enhance the content (upconverting, noise reduction, etc) or anything like that, just as close to 1-to-1 as possible for a media center I want to put together.

Would the HQ-Slow/er/est profiles in MeGUI be good enough for what I want to do or should I be looking at more customized settings or custom quantizers?

Thanks.

R3Z
28th June 2007, 05:57
Are you the _leech_ from neogaf ?

In response to your question, dont use the profiles in megui as they dont always suit your needs.

My typical settings that gain upto 70% compressibility depending on the source with what i percieve to be transparency are;

AVS Script
Load_Stdcall_plugin("c:\program files\avisynth 2.5\plugins\yadif.dll")

DGDecode_mpeg2source("D:\Ben Lee - We're All In This Together [576p.d2v")

Yadif(mode=0,order=1) # deinterlacing top field first
BlockBuster(method="dither") #mask dct with static dither


My x264 settings;
x264.exe --sar 140:99 --crf 19 --ref 8 --mixed-refs
--no-fast-pskip --bframes 4 --b-pyramid --b-rdo --bime
--weightb --direct auto --filter -2,-1 --subme 6
--deadzone-inter 10 --deadzone-intra 5 --analyse all
--8x8dct --qpmin 8--qpmax 49 --threads 2 --thread-input
--cqmfile "prestige.cqm" --progress --no-dct-decimate
--me umh --output "filename.mp4" "input.avs"

This uses the prestige.cqm matrix which is located here http://forum.doom9.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=7278&d=1180682736

Dark Shikari
28th June 2007, 06:16
Your command line is missing --trellis 2. It provides a very worthwhile quality/filesize boost in my experience and is considerably more effective than high --ref numbers relative to the speed cost.

R3Z
28th June 2007, 06:41
Your command line is missing --trellis 2. It provides a very worthwhile quality/filesize boost in my experience and is considerably more effective than high --ref numbers relative to the speed cost.

You cant use deadzone inter/intra with trellis, so for me the extra detail ie the grain or textures that masks the blocks is better to keep. I am hitting over 60% compressibility most times so the extra bitrate isnt hurting. The speed hit is also too much.

Good suggestion for _leech_ to try though.

_leech_
28th June 2007, 06:46
Thanks for the suggestions, guys! And yea, i'm the GAFer ;)

R3Z
28th June 2007, 06:58
Thanks for the suggestions, guys! And yea, i'm the GAFer ;)

Well i am Ryudo :) The net makes it a small world !

PuzZLeR
28th June 2007, 10:11
It's funny. You have not physically met these people, and may never do so, however you build bonds all over the place from different forums, etc. I even have relationships and friendships with many of them. It's really weird...

_leech_, before you dive in deep to your DvD ripping project, let me suggest you try HandBrake. It's, in my opinion, the coolest, simplest and fastest DvD to AVC converter around and has a great forum as well. (Yeah, I have more friends there too.:))

It also produces content that is fully QT compatible, so you can be certain it will play almost anywhere that decodes AVC. They even support full anamorphic encoding - real neat.

However, if you need to, HandBrake will also let you use advanced x264 features as well if you want to go there, even from the command lines in the previous posts.

You may want to give it a try.

http://handbrake.m0k.org/?page_id=8

audyovydeo
28th June 2007, 13:59
... let me suggest you try HandBrake. It's, in my opinion, the coolest, simplest and fastest DvD to AVC ...

@Puzzler, I'm beginning to think you get commissions on Handbrake sales ;-)

re : QT compatibility. So far I've used the megui QT profile settings , and it *sorta* works. (QT stutters some, then gets the hang of playing back. On the other hand the wiki says QT implementation doesnt handle CABAC, and megui's settings use it, and it works.
Which leads me to think the final word has yet to be said regarding which _264 settings QT supports exactly, to a fault.
Your take ?

audyovydeo

Tack
28th June 2007, 23:49
This uses the prestige.cqm matrix which is located here http://forum.doom9.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=7278&d=1180682736I am extremely impressed with this matrix. I had previously been using *.mp4 guy's high detail matrix with AQ. The prestige matrix uses slightly more bits (0.5% to 7% more in the admittedly few and short sample clips I test on), but its grain retention appears to be phenomenally good for such low bitrate increase.

Thanks for pointing this out. :)

PuzZLeR
29th June 2007, 01:05
@Puzzler, I'm beginning to think you get commissions on Handbrake sales ;-)

Actually I do. I get a percentage of zero.:p

Yes, I adore HandBrake because it’s an x264 GUI that is so easy, fast and produces quality output that is widely compatible. It’s about time we had a slice of Apple on the PC. And if you want the advanced features of x264, it gives you a special tab for that too. What more can you ask for? Also the devs are real neat guys.

I know some people here will razz me for the QT compatibility, and Apple/Steve Job’s nitpicking, but I prefer to encode video that will be play practically anywhere, with almost any computer or AVC decoder/device and be more “future-proof”. Encoding with tons of MRFs and b-pyramids may improve quality by a hair, but is it worth it when this content will slow down encoding to the level of grass growing, choke up many decoders and get stranded on only your PC, with a few select players, for who-knows-how-long when it comes to playback?

My opinion folks.

Having said that, the misconception of CABAC is not that it isn’t QT compatible, it is, it’s just not yet compatible for the iPod and AppleTV. This is due to device/hardware limitations that don’t yet support higher complexity features of H.264 video. We are, I believe, one model away. As well, this is just Apple’s way of doing a traditional skimming of the market, as is the case with all new tech, squeezing us to buy more later with later models.

So if CABAC is making QT hiccup somewhat it must be the other options that were encoded with it. Maybe multiple MRFs or mixed refs, etc.

Now I’m not too sure of this because HB does my thinking, but what breaks QT compatibility are:

Macroblocks (8x8dct) – not QT compatible when turned on.
B frames maximum 1 (and no B-pyramids)
Mbaff=1 when considering the fields in interlacing
Custom Quantization Matrix (cqm)
High Profile and above

As well, QT does not support anamorphic, only square pixels and a PAR of 1:1, but the devs of HB have inserted a special hack/atom into the .mp4 file that works around this problem. Real neat!