Quote:
Originally Posted by Vit
I've encoded full STEM clip at 15 MBits/s using this patch and Sonic CineVision 2.6. Sonic's encode is consistently better, am I doing something wrong or commercial encoders are not as crappy as some x264 apologists claim?
Here's the command line:
x264.910.modified.exe --pass 1 --fps 23.976 --bitrate 15000 --level 4.1 --keyint 24 --min-keyint 1 --ref 3 --mixed-refs --no-fast-pskip --bframes 2 --b-pyramid --bime --weightb --filter -2,-2 --subme 6 --analyse p8x8,b8x8,i4x4,i8x8 --8x8dct --vbv-bufsize 45000 --vbv-maxrate 30000 --threads auto --thread-input --progress --no-dct-decimate --output "f:\stem_x264.264" "F:\Source Files\StEM_full.yuv" 1920x1080 --aq-mode 2
Second's pass settings are the same, but with --pass 2. I can post some pictures if anyone is interested
|
So basically:
1. You use awful settings and wonder why the output sucks (sorry folks, but I'm not going to make x264 compensate for user stupidity here).
2. Instead of asking "how can I make these settings better", you start whining about "x264 apologists"...
Now, if what you actually meant was "How can I improve the quality of my output" and you just mistyped, try this instead:
x264.910.modified.exe --pass 1 --fps 23.976 --bitrate 15000 --level 4.1 --ref 4 --mixed-refs --no-fast-pskip --bframes 3 --b-pyramid --me umh --mixed-refs --bime --weightb --filter -2,-2 --subme 7 --b-rdo --8x8dct --threads auto --progress --no-dct-decimate --output "f:\stem_x264.264" "F:\Source Files\StEM_full.yuv" 1920x1080
15 megabit 1080p is a rather bad place to compare at though, given that any decent encoder should be able to basically give transparency, and if you can't pick out the details between two encodes without using a microscope, its hard to compare them.