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 AVC / H.264

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 24th November 2009, 18:11   #1  |  Link
Scoty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 74
Badaboom yes or no?

Have Badaboom a good or bad quality. Badaboom is fast but good and what is better?
Scoty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 18:33   #2  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,472
Quality is terrible compared with x264 so don't pay for this crap.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 18:53   #3  |  Link
poisondeathray
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,386
Agree with atak, and this test was done with abr, not crf... (you'd get better quality with crf)


Last edited by poisondeathray; 24th November 2009 at 18:56.
poisondeathray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 19:07   #4  |  Link
Cyber-Mav
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 244
i fina badaboom good enough to do quick conversions for playing video on me iphone.
Cyber-Mav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 19:09   #5  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyber-Mav View Post
i fina badaboom good enough to do quick conversions for playing video on me iphone.
Did you compare Badaboom against x264 with settings the encode at the same speed ???
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.


LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 19:34   #6  |  Link
Scoty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 74
Ok i make a test with RipBot264 but this extrem slow and the qulity is not good. For a Video 03:50 minutes i need with the x264 profile 40 minutes. Whene i convert a Movie with 2 houres with RipBot264 i need days.

Last edited by Scoty; 24th November 2009 at 19:36.
Scoty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 19:37   #7  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,160
Of course x264 will be slow, if you use slow settings

What about trying something like "--preset fast" ???
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.


LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 19:41   #8  |  Link
Scoty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 74
I have use the standard settings and output mkv.

Last edited by Scoty; 24th November 2009 at 19:43.
Scoty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 19:52   #9  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoty View Post
I have use the standard settings and output mkv.
So you want "fast" settings, but you used "medium" (standard) settings. And now you complain about speed?
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.



Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 24th November 2009 at 19:56.
LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:00   #10  |  Link
Scoty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 74
Yes but with medium settings the quality is not good. With fast settings....??
Scoty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:03   #11  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoty View Post
Yes but with medium settings the quality is not good. With fast settings....??
Of course "medium" settings will deliver worse quality than "slow" settings. And "fast" settings will be even worse. If you want speed, you must sacrifice some quality.

However claiming that x264's quality with "medium" settings was "no good" is blasphemy. Especially if we keep in mind how horrible Badaboom looks!
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.



Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 24th November 2009 at 20:07.
LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:05   #12  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoRd_MuldeR View Post
Of course "medium" settings will deliver worse quality than "slow" settings. And "fast" settings will be even worse. If you want speed, you must sacrifice some quality.

However claiming that x264's quality with "medium" settings is "no good" is blasphemy. Especially if we keep in mind how horrible Badaboom looks!
He's probably encoding at very low bitrates with x264 and comparing to high bitrates with Badaboom...
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:07   #13  |  Link
poisondeathray
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,386
There is a tradeoff between quality and speed. Choose one or the other or something in the middle.

There is no question that x264 max quality is better than badaboom's max quality

If your current results aren't good enough another option is to use a lower crf value or higher bitrate too
poisondeathray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:08   #14  |  Link
Scoty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 74
I make a new test with 2-pass with 8000 bitrate. I hope with this settings looks better.
Scoty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:08   #15  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,472
Quote:
He's probably encoding at very low bitrates with x264 and comparing to high bitrates with Badaboom...
By default CRF22 is used in Ripbot264. However if you change to 2-pass then default kbps is 1024. Scoty just USE default CRF22. DON'T USE 2-pass!
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:10   #16  |  Link
Scoty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 74
I have make default with the first test but the Video looks nod good.
Scoty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:14   #17  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,472
Quote:
I have make default with the first test but the Video looks nod good.
You definitely do something wrong! CRF@22 with default 4.0 HIGH profile should give excellent quality. BTW what does 'nod good' mean in terms of quality? Show us Log from Logs folder.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:14   #18  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoty View Post
I have make default with the first test but the Video looks nod good.
Repeating it over and over again doesn't make it any better

Most important make sure that you only compare files of identical size when judging quality!
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.


LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:14   #19  |  Link
prOnorama
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoty View Post
Ok i make a test with RipBot264 but this extrem slow and the qulity is not good. For a Video 03:50 minutes i need with the x264 profile 40 minutes. Whene i convert a Movie with 2 houres with RipBot264 i need days.

I get around 20 FPS on a quad core Phenom 955 with x264 medium settings, CRF 23, progressive source to 720p output. For 1080p output I still get 11-12 FPS.

Maybe it's time to get a faster CPU if a 2 hour movie takes days to encode at those settings.
prOnorama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2009, 20:17   #20  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,472
Quote:
Maybe it's time to get a faster CPU if a 2 hour movie takes days to encode at those settings.
Exactly. You should finally dump your 'Pentium 4'. You can buy Athlon X4 for less than 100 euro these days.
Atak_Snajpera 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 11:21.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.