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 > MPEG-4 ASP

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 30th March 2003, 15:45   #1  |  Link
trbarry
Registered User
 
trbarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gainesville FL USA
Posts: 2,092
What is SimpleIDCT?

This is only sort of an Xvid question but this forum is probably where the related knowledge is, so I guess I'll dare to pose it here.

I heard Xvid now optionally uses a different SimpleIDCT function that is faster or nicer than the old IDCT for some reason. Can anyone tell me if that would also be true if I ported it to my copy of MPEG2DEC2.dll (or MPEG2DEC3) for Avisynth frame serving?

Anyone know the advantages for MPEG-2? (speed?, quality?, would even work?)

Prior to this the IDCT for DVD2AVI's, MPEGDEC's, and Xvid appeared to have mostly the same lineage.

- Tom
trbarry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2003, 16:49   #2  |  Link
Nic
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Posts: 3,285
Simple iDCT is just a very accurate version of iDCT, the iDCT we were using (and the one most use i.e. intel mmx code with peter gubanov's modifications) was just a little inaccurate which emerged as smearing in QPel.

It could very easily be put into dvd2avi, but the difference in quality (if any) would be minute I'd guess.

Hope that helps,
-Nic
Nic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2003, 16:59   #3  |  Link
trbarry
Registered User
 
trbarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gainesville FL USA
Posts: 2,092
Quote:
i.e. intel mmx code with peter gubanov's modifications)
Too bad. When we put in DmitryR's SSE2 version of that I made sure it gave exactly the same results as the other one.

Do you know if SimpleIDCT is any faster or slower?

- Tom
trbarry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2003, 17:02   #4  |  Link
Nic
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Posts: 3,285
Well micheal from ffmpeg has made the mmx version of it, get the latest xvid CVS code. Id guess it's a tad slower. The Intel one is spec compliant, but just inaccurate enough to make an error in QPel

-Nic
Nic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2003, 18:31   #5  |  Link
trbarry
Registered User
 
trbarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gainesville FL USA
Posts: 2,092
Naw, heck with it.

If I wanted a very very slightly more accurate and slightly slower IDCT then I could just use float. I guess it was a dumb idea. And I don't even think MPEG-2 uses qpel.

- Tom
trbarry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2003, 18:36   #6  |  Link
Bishep
from Russia
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 15
Actually, I misunderstood. Is there smearing qpel problem in your latest decoder, Nic? Or it's OK.
Bishep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2003, 19:06   #7  |  Link
Nic
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Posts: 3,285
Well my latest decoder uses simple idct, so im hoping it works fine, but havent had time to test for that QPel smearing properly (I looked, but couldnt see it). Any feedback would be appreciated

-Nic
Nic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2003, 22:42   #8  |  Link
sungey
another encoding dude..^^
 
sungey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 100
Nic, how bout your xvid.dll build 30/03/2003 (encoding) ... is it using Simple idct too ?
__________________
-- SunG --

" The more knowledge you give, the more knowledge you gain. Its different from wealth. "
sungey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 01:30   #9  |  Link
unplugged
Registered User
 
unplugged's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Italia
Posts: 412
Interesting thread
@Nic, so we can say that smearing problem is basically a rounding problem...?
Talking about ffdshow (I'm using 20030103), Is that "simple" default iDCT profile equivalent to simple-iDCT?

Thanx!
unplugged is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 03:27   #10  |  Link
((( atom )))
noise is all around us...
 
((( atom )))'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: - deep within -
Posts: 466
@nic: the smearing got a lot better, but it is still noticeable, at least with a small clip i kept for testing purposes.
the clip itself is a bit old and i will try to find the time and re-rip and -encode the scene the next days so i could tell for sure.

btw is that broken b-frame / missing ref-frame problem familiar to anybody? i always get that message on top of my movie (wich plays awfully jerky) when i want to use ffdshow with xvid-decoder.
__________________
((( atom )))
((( atom ))) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 08:13   #11  |  Link
Didée
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,391
Quote:
Originally posted by ((( atom )))
@nic: the smearing got a lot better, but it is still noticeable, at least with a small clip i kept for testing purposes.
the clip itself is a bit old and i will try to find the time and re-rip and -encode the scene the next days so i could tell for sure.
Re-encoding is a very good idea in that case.
If I put all comments (dropped here, there, and somewhere) together correctly, then some older builds used qpel without actually using simple-idct. Those builds produced "burnt-in" smearing, I fear. Me myself found some older clips that show heavy smearing even with the newest filters or DLLs, whereas the smearing has gotten minor in encodes produced with the latest builds.
__________________
- We´re at the beginning of the end of mankind´s childhood -

My little flickr gallery. (Yes indeed, I do have hobbies other than digital video!)
Didée is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 08:37   #12  |  Link
Nic
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Posts: 3,285
As far as I know, (I got GomGom to clue me in a little while back) The QPel smearing actually occured while encoding, rather than necessarily when decoding. So your old QPel clips that have that smearing may well always have it. Re-Encoding should remove all smearing with QPel.

Feedback always appreciated

Cheers,
-Nic
Nic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 12:03   #13  |  Link
((( atom )))
noise is all around us...
 
((( atom )))'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: - deep within -
Posts: 466
so i reencoded that little testclip and beeing decoded with nic's the smearing is gone, totally. using ffdshow it is there as it always was.
so there seems to be a fix now, great.

that clip i have is really nasty in producing that smearing, so there are very good chances, no one else will find any smearing again.

so nic, as i understand you are able to tell what exactly caused the problem, right? please go and tell the libavcodec/ffdshow developpers (i have actually switched to linux for watching movies, so i can`t actually benefit from you decoder..).

__________________
((( atom )))
((( atom ))) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 12:27   #14  |  Link
Nic
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Posts: 3,285
Im sure they now because its Micheal from ffmpeg code's we're using to do the simple idct

So I guess just be patient and they'll update

Cheers,
-Nic
Nic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 13:27   #15  |  Link
JimiK
just me
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 158
AFAIK there is already a new "libav". I'm not using linux for watching movies, but I think an upgrade of mplayer could do the trick. For all windows people: we have to wait until milan compiles a new ffdshow for us where he'll use the new libav. He said he'll do so this week.
Best regards,
JimiK
JimiK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 20:35   #16  |  Link
CruNcher
Registered User
 
CruNcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,926
@ Nic
which fdct_ and idct_ function your build uses if SSE2 is detected fdct_sse2 and idct_sse2 ?
CruNcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 20:39   #17  |  Link
Nic
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Posts: 3,285
fdct_sse2 is used for fdct, but simple idct is used for idct no matter what processor is detected

Cheers,
-Nic
Nic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 21:06   #18  |  Link
CruNcher
Registered User
 
CruNcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,926
@ Nic

better use fdct_mmx even if sse2 is detected i tested it here on my P4 1.8 (williamete core) and it gives better results psnr wise http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49874 and it's only a tad slowerand the best filesize is decreased
CruNcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2003, 21:14   #19  |  Link
Nic
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Posts: 3,285
Cheers for the update, makes me wonder if we need a simple fdct

-Nic
Nic 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 03:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.