What do you think about these matrices from a commercial DVD?

[mgh]

This info was extracted with DGIndex from a commercial Indian DVD. The average kbps was about 1900, the encoded size 720x480 Film at 29.97 fps. The visual quality was surprisingly good.

Intra Luma and Chroma Matrix at encoded frame 0:
8 16 19 22 26 27 29 34
16 16 22 24 27 29 34 37
19 22 26 27 29 34 34 38
22 22 26 27 29 34 37 40
22 26 27 29 32 35 40 48
26 27 29 32 35 40 48 58
26 27 29 34 38 46 56 69
27 29 35 38 46 56 69 83

NonIntra Luma and Chroma Matrix at encoded frame 0:
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16

Request comments from the Gurus on the forum.

[Taurus]

Are you kidding?
This is just the standard mpeg matrix used by many encoders like TMPGEnc and CCE.

cheers

Taurus

[mgh]

Oops!
My mistake. Thanx for pointing out

[sheislegend75]

:)

I do wonder about the "Log Quantization Matrix" function in DGIndex. I have logged many DVDs to play around with the matrices, but notice that some movies have many many many different matrices. I don't know much about matrices BTW, little more than the bare minimum.

Here's a short example of what I mean, this dvd has these 2 repeated many times in the log.

Intra Luma and Chroma Matrix:
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9
8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9
8 8 8 8 8 9 9 10
8 8 8 8 8 9 9 10
8 8 8 8 8 9 10 12
8 8 8 8 9 10 12 15
8 8 8 9 10 12 14 17
8 8 9 10 12 14 17 21

NonIntra Luma and Chroma Matrix:
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

Intra Luma and Chroma Matrix:
8 8 10 11 13 14 15 17
8 8 11 12 14 15 17 19
10 11 13 14 15 17 17 19
11 11 13 14 15 17 19 20
11 13 14 15 16 18 20 24
13 14 15 16 18 20 24 29
13 14 15 17 19 23 28 35
14 15 18 19 23 28 35 42

NonIntra Luma and Chroma Matrix:
8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12
9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12
9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13
10 10 11 11 12 12 13 14
10 11 11 12 13 13 14 14
11 11 12 12 13 14 14 15
11 12 12 13 14 14 15 16
12 12 13 14 14 15 16 17


Would it be better/worse/subjective to use this matrix to encode an xvid avi of this movie? Or use it for other sources? Any expert advice?

[Sharc]

CCE produces these matrices dynamically when setting the parameter CCEAQM=1 (Adaptive Quantization Matrix).
The elements of the standard CCE matrix are then set to 1/2 or 1/4 of the standard value depending on the source material for optimum results.
You can find some more explanations in the CCE manual.

For mpeg4 encoding you should probably better use the matrices that are recommended for the the mepg4 encoder.

[sheislegend75]

ahh good to know! Thanks :D

[manono]

This info was extracted with DGIndex from a commercial Indian DVD. The average kbps was about 1900, the encoded size 720x480 Film at 29.97 fps. The visual quality was surprisingly good.
All Indian DVDs use either that MPEG Standard quantisation matrix or the Standard matrix. That's one of the (many) things that make them the worst DVDs in the world. Hollywood studios quit using those matrices years ago. I might question just how surprisingly good a movie with a bitrate of 1900 looks. Sounds like a boot to me.

[Boulder]

All Indian DVDs use either that MPEG Standard quantisation matrix or the Standard matrix. That's one of the (many) things that make them the worst DVDs in the world. Hollywood studios quit using those matrices years ago. I might question just how surprisingly good a movie with a bitrate of 1900 looks. Sounds like a boot to me.What matrix would you recommend as a "general matrix" instead of the MPEG standard? I haven't been able to find a good match in terms of quality and bitrate requirements (I know, depends on the source ;)) Let's assume a regular source where something like 3000-3500kbps is enough to make it look good.

[manono]

Hi-

Bitrate doesn't mean much to me. Much more important is the resulting Q. But I understand what you're asking. What's good to use for a longish movie on a DVD5, or maybe an average or shorter movie with some extras, also on a DVD5? The matrix I use the most, probably, and which compresses similarly to the MPEG Standard matrix, but is better in my opinion, is this one from a retail DVD:

08 08 08 09 11 13 14 17
08 08 09 11 13 13 14 17
08 08 11 12 13 14 17 94
09 11 13 13 14 17 17 94
11 11 13 13 14 17 94 94
13 13 14 16 17 20 94 94
13 13 14 17 94 94 94 94
13 14 17 94 94 94 94 94

12 12 13 14 15 16 22 26
12 13 14 15 16 22 26 32
13 14 15 16 22 26 32 41
14 15 16 22 26 32 41 53
15 16 22 26 32 41 53 94
16 22 26 32 41 53 70 94
22 26 32 41 53 70 94 94
26 32 41 53 94 94 94 94

My point about the Indian DVDs though, is that they have dual layer DVDs to work with. And even though the movies are often quite long, if they had decent hardware encoders, and didn't insist on using CBR encoding often, and PAL masters for the NTSC DVDs, and encoding for interlaced 29.97fps, rather than for progressive 23.976fps with pulldown, and inferior quantisation matrices, and so many other things, then the quality of their DVD releases would improve, and maybe, just maybe, Indian films on DVD would be more widely seen, more widely explored, and more widely appreciated. But through a combination of obsolete equipment, poor quality control, incompetence, and a don't-care attitude, these things are a laughing-stock.

[mgh]

All Indian DVDs use either that MPEG Standard quantisation matrix or the Standard matrix. That's one of the (many) things that make them the worst DVDs in the world. Hollywood studios quit using those matrices years ago. I might question just how surprisingly good a movie with a bitrate of 1900 looks. Sounds like a boot to me.

Sorry for the late reply. I was doing some research with my own collection:)
You are 100% correct on the quantization matrices used byIndian
DVDs.
Some more info. The kbps ranges from 4500 to 6500 for DVDs. Some of them are encoded to NTSC at 23.976 fps with pulldown.
At least one of the DVD labels uses CCE Pro.

The DVDs of latest movies do use VBR (determined by comparing kbps of clips of fast moving scenes and slow moving scenes) and are distinctly better. I agree that compared to Hollywood DVDs, the clarity needs to be improved.
IMHO part of the reason is that the film producers are now more informed about the requirements of digital media. Also, the quality of the photography has improved quite a bit in the last three years or so.

Re the DVD I mentioned, to me blocking is bad. It did not have blocking on my 29 inch CRT that is why I said surprisingly good.

Thanks for your observations.

[tom942]

Hi-

Bitrate doesn't mean much to me. Much more important is the resulting Q. But I understand what you're asking. What's good to use for a longish movie on a DVD5, or maybe an average or shorter movie with some extras, also on a DVD5? The matrix I use the most, probably, and which compresses similarly to the MPEG Standard matrix, but is better in my opinion, is this one from a retail DVD:

08 08 08 09 11 13 14 17
08 08 09 11 13 13 14 17
08 08 11 12 13 14 17 94
09 11 13 13 14 17 17 94
11 11 13 13 14 17 94 94
13 13 14 16 17 20 94 94
13 13 14 17 94 94 94 94
13 14 17 94 94 94 94 94

12 12 13 14 15 16 22 26
12 13 14 15 16 22 26 32
13 14 15 16 22 26 32 41
14 15 16 22 26 32 41 53
15 16 22 26 32 41 53 94
16 22 26 32 41 53 70 94
22 26 32 41 53 70 94 94
26 32 41 53 94 94 94 94



Boulder, this one is really good. Manono sent me it in a PM. I call it now FOX3 version 2 because he told me that he uses it as a replacement of FOX3. In my matrix folder I call it: "FOX 3 V2 Manono MPEG STD 1 (68%)"

I have used with HC and DVD-RB with Bitrate Distribution, and even in the fade in's I don´t need to set Lumgain.

Other that you can try is this one. Manono also sent it to me in the PM:

08 12 13 14 15 16 19 22
12 13 14 15 16 19 22 26
13 14 15 16 19 22 26 32
14 15 16 19 22 26 32 41
15 16 19 22 26 32 41 53
16 19 22 26 32 41 53 70
19 22 26 32 41 53 70 94
22 26 32 41 53 70 94 127

12 12 13 14 15 16 19 22
12 13 14 15 16 19 22 26
13 14 15 16 19 22 26 32
14 15 16 19 22 26 32 41
15 16 19 22 26 32 41 53
16 19 22 26 32 41 53 70
19 22 26 32 41 53 70 94
22 26 32 41 53 70 94 127

It is one called SONY MEDIUM. In my matrix folder I call it "SONY MEDIUM Manono MPEG STD 2 (63%)".

The percentanges are relative to FHE (100%).

I try first FOX3V2, if the quant are high, I try SONY MEDIUM.

Greetings.

[Piper]

After a quick search, I came across Manono's custom matrix today as I was unsatisfied with how a few of the built in matrices in HCEnc were performing with a source with a lot of dark scenes. The "FOX 3 V2 Manono MPEG STD 1 (68%)" matrix as tom942 calls it worked a treat with this source.
:thanks: