Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 13th May 2016, 08:40   #3701  |  Link
LigH
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
 
LigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 5,936
x265 1.9+167-bebae72f9db7 provides a few changes regarding the grain handling, and a new tweak:

Code:
   --[no-]recursion-skip         Enable early exit from recursion. Default enabled
__________________

New German Gleitz board
MediaFire: x264 | x265 | VPx | AOM | Xvid
LigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th May 2016, 17:36   #3702  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by LigH View Post
x265 1.9+167-bebae72f9db7 provides a few changes regarding the grain handling, and a new tweak:

Code:
   --[no-]recursion-skip         Enable early exit from recursion. Default enabled
I think these are some actually pretty huge changes in regards to grain. It would be a great build for everyone struggling with detail and grain issues to retest with, particularly but not exclusively, with --tune grain.

MultiCoreWare could presumably use a lot of feedback on the results here.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th May 2016, 18:13   #3703  |  Link
x265_Project
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 596
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
MultiCoreWare could presumably use a lot of feedback on the results here.
Yes, please.
x265_Project is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th May 2016, 19:24   #3704  |  Link
fauxreaper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 13
I've tested --no-recursion-skip on a short sample that was posted on devel list (https://mailman.videolan.org/piperma...ay/010350.html) and the results are good.
  • Reduced ghosting (but ghosting still exists)
  • Increased visual quality
  • Reduced bitrate (1/3 less bitrate on same crf)

Encode gets 50% slower.
fauxreaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th May 2016, 19:59   #3705  |  Link
littlepox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by fauxreaper View Post
Encode gets 50% slower.
ROFT

But at least they made the breakthrough, good job.
littlepox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th May 2016, 21:21   #3706  |  Link
ndkamal
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris
Posts: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magik Mark View Post
Can you post a before & after image? Thanks
I have posted some pictures in "Comparisons of x264 vs x265 " section forum
__________________
Intel Core i5 4200
RAM 8 Go
Nvidia GeForce 840M
Windows 10
ndkamal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th May 2016, 09:32   #3707  |  Link
pingfr
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 185
@littlepox: Would you say it is safe and a quality benefit/visual benefit to use your custom parameters you cooked us since 1.9+1 with the newest --no-recursion-skip feature/tweak they added in 1.9+167?

Something along the lines of:

--preset veryslow --ctu 32 --max-tu-size 16 --crf 18 --no-recursion-skip --tu-intra-depth 2 --tu-inter-depth 2 --rdpenalty 2 --me 3 --subme 5 --merange 44 --b-intra --no-rect --no-amp --ref 5 --weightb --keyint 360 --min-keyint 1 --bframes 8 --aq-mode 1 --aq-strength 1.0 --rd 5 --psy-rd 1.6 --psy-rdoq 8.0 --rdoq-level 1 --no-sao --no-open-gop --rc-lookahead 80 --max-merge 4 --qcomp 0.80 --no-strong-intra-smoothing --deblock -2:-2 --qg-size 16 --pbratio 1.2



Edit: Typo, I meant 1.9+167 not 1.9+197.

Last edited by pingfr; 15th May 2016 at 03:34. Reason: Edit: Typo, I meant 1.9+167 not 1.9+197. :p
pingfr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th May 2016, 10:27   #3708  |  Link
littlepox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by pingfr View Post
@littlepox: Would you say it is safe and a quality benefit/visual benefit to use your custom parameters you cooked us since 1.9+1 with the newest --no-recursion-skip feature/tweak they added in 1.9+197?

Something along the lines of:

--preset veryslow --ctu 32 --max-tu-size 16 --crf 18 --no-recursion-skip --tu-intra-depth 2 --tu-inter-depth 2 --rdpenalty 2 --me 3 --subme 5 --merange 44 --b-intra --no-rect --no-amp --ref 5 --weightb --keyint 360 --min-keyint 1 --bframes 8 --aq-mode 1 --aq-strength 1.0 --rd 5 --psy-rd 1.6 --psy-rdoq 8.0 --rdoq-level 1 --no-sao --no-open-gop --rc-lookahead 80 --max-merge 4 --qcomp 0.80 --no-strong-intra-smoothing --deblock -2:-2 --qg-size 16 --pbratio 1.2

I would say it's unsafe for any version newer than 1.9+10
littlepox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th May 2016, 14:04   #3709  |  Link
pingfr
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 185
@littlepox: Alrighty, that makes sense. Let's wait on newer visually optimzed 1080p and 720p custom profiles from you for 1.9+167++ then.

Edit: Typo, I meant 1.9+167 not 1.9+197.

Last edited by pingfr; 15th May 2016 at 03:35. Reason: Edit: Typo, I meant 1.9+167 not 1.9+197. :p
pingfr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th May 2016, 20:12   #3710  |  Link
pistacho
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Spain
Posts: 479
Bug report:

x265 builds 1.9.150 and newer crashes if filenames have accentuated characters on Spanish Windows (CMD with codepage 850 Multilingual Latin I). Probably the problem occurs with other languages as well.

Example:

With build 1.9.169 crashes:



Same command line with build 1.9.149 works fine:



Problem exist from this commit: https://bitbucket.org/multicoreware/...d7a09f2cb244bf

Thanks!
__________________
BDtoAVCHD - One Click Blu-Ray 2D/3D to BD5/BD9/BD25/MKV
BDtoAVCHD Doom9 Forum thread
MVCsource MVC 3D Avisynth Source Plugin
MVCenc MVC 3D Encoder
pistacho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th May 2016, 21:11   #3711  |  Link
Ma
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by pistacho View Post
x265 builds 1.9.150 and newer crashes if filenames have accentuated characters on Spanish Windows
'--qpfile' is not converted to Unicode yet. Fix should be soon. Thanks for report.
-----------------
Patch file for '--qpfile' and '--csv' attached.
-----------------
There are 2 problems with '--qpfile' -- now it doesn't support Unicode filenames and if you specify nonexistent file GCC build of x265 hangs, VS 2015 build of x265 exits with wired error messages.

So in patch 13370 Unicode filenames are working with '--qpfile' and '--csv' options and if you specify nonexistent file in '--qpfile' option, x265 displays error message and encode without hangs.

For tests I've compiled multilib version of x265 1.9+169 + 13370 + 13312 patches -- http://www.msystem.waw.pl/x265/x265-...+qpfile+csv.7z
Attached Files
File Type: txt qpfile-csv.patch.txt (2.2 KB, 18 views)

Last edited by Ma; 15th May 2016 at 09:43.
Ma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2016, 11:24   #3712  |  Link
pistacho
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Spain
Posts: 479
I confirm that now works again with accented characters. Also if --qpfile file name not exists error message is displayed but continues encoding (not hangs anymore).

Thanks!
__________________
BDtoAVCHD - One Click Blu-Ray 2D/3D to BD5/BD9/BD25/MKV
BDtoAVCHD Doom9 Forum thread
MVCsource MVC 3D Avisynth Source Plugin
MVCenc MVC 3D Encoder
pistacho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2016, 16:28   #3713  |  Link
Grojm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by fauxreaper View Post
I've tested --no-recursion-skip on a short sample that was posted on devel list (https://mailman.videolan.org/piperma...ay/010350.html) and the results are good.
  • Reduced ghosting (but ghosting still exists)
  • Increased visual quality
  • Reduced bitrate (1/3 less bitrate on same crf)

Encode gets 50% slower.
I have compared the results from the mailing list and the no-recursion-skip version is only slightly better, the issue is far from solved. Also, the no-recursion-skip version was 10% larger, and encoding time goes up. Instead of finding workaround with only minor improvement but at the cost of major slowdown, they should focus on finding the root of this issue. x264 is completely free from this artifact, so ghosting is by no means a tradeoff you have to make for motion based video compression.

Last edited by Grojm; 17th May 2016 at 17:17.
Grojm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2016, 17:03   #3714  |  Link
littlepox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 218
As clear as I remember, x264 used to have all the same blames: slow, blurry, banding/blocking, motion artifacts... It took years to mature, not over a single night.

It shall be same for x265, which is mostly a brand new encoder whose internal logic has changed almost completely. Do not expect miracles out of it to be an immediate, all-round upgrade for x264.

I'm always emphasizing that currently we prefer x264 over x265, NOT because x265 is poor, but x264 is just incredibly good. Do you blame Korean/Japanese/Singaporean table tennis players for their losing to Chinese in competitions? If you ever compare x265 to all other encoders like Adobe H264, Quicktime, libvpx... You'll realize that it's far outstanding.

Thanks again for all the great work of the developers; keep it up.
littlepox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2016, 17:19   #3715  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grojm View Post
I have compared the results from the mailing list and the no-recursion-skip version is only slightly better, the issue is far from solved. Also, the no-recursion-skip version was 10% larger, and encoding time goes up. Instead of finding workaround with only minor improvement but the cost of mayor slowdown, they should focus on finding the root of this issue. x264 is completely free from this artifact, so ghosting is by no means a tradeoff you have to make for motion based video compression.
Don't assume that the very first check-in of a new feature includes full optimization or full quality tuning. x265 has gotten a lot better and a lot faster over the last 18 months!

For something as far along as x265, having any single new feature that offers an obvious visual quality improvement is a huge accomplishment. x264 hasn't had one of those since, sheesh, mbtree? Most codec development is about squeezing out a bunch of discreet <<1% compression efficiency gains.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2016, 17:24   #3716  |  Link
littlepox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
Don't assume that the very first check-in of a new feature includes full optimization or full quality tuning. x265 has gotten a lot better and a lot faster over the last 18 months!

For something as far along as x265, having any single new feature that offers an obvious visual quality improvement is a huge accomplishment. x264 hasn't had one of those since, sheesh, mbtree? Most codec development is about squeezing out a bunch of discreet <<1% compression efficiency gains.
Hmm...recently x264 has added aq-mode=3 into the vanilla build which gives some significant improvements. However that had been in unofficial builds (like tMod or kmod) for years.
littlepox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2016, 17:48   #3717  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 734
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlepox View Post
Hmm...recently x264 has added aq-mode=3 into the vanilla build which gives some significant improvements. However that had been in unofficial builds (like tMod or kmod) for years.
Whenever I tried that, I wasn't able to find the proper strength setting (that would look better than mode 1 strength 0.8 which I use for cel anime). What strengths are you using?
(Sorry for off-topic.)
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2016, 17:54   #3718  |  Link
littlepox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by mandarinka View Post
Whenever I tried that, I wasn't able to find the proper strength setting (that would look better than mode 1 strength 0.8 which I use for cel anime). What strengths are you using?
(Sorry for off-topic.)
I'd often pick aq=3:0.8 for high quality jap anime BDRip for crf≈16, 10bit x264.

Not so sure for your case; it's possible aq=1 is still relatively better. try strength=0.7?
littlepox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2016, 08:26   #3719  |  Link
jlpsvk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by fauxreaper View Post
I've tested --no-recursion-skip on a short sample that was posted on devel list (https://mailman.videolan.org/piperma...ay/010350.html) and the results are good.
  • Reduced ghosting (but ghosting still exists)
  • Increased visual quality
  • Reduced bitrate (1/3 less bitrate on same crf)

Encode gets 50% slower.

points 1,2 and 4 are correct. but don't know where you get 1/3 bitrate saving. encoded 2 movies, and have only about 130kbps save on the same settings and crf.
jlpsvk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2016, 11:34   #3720  |  Link
RainyDog
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlepox View Post
Hmm...recently x264 has added aq-mode=3 into the vanilla build which gives some significant improvements. However that had been in unofficial builds (like tMod or kmod) for years.
I thought you'd said that aq-mode 3 was a waste of bits in your x265 tune-film thread littlepox? Or is it better suited to x264?
RainyDog is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:11.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.