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 > New and alternative video codecs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 17th December 2002, 02:06   #21  |  Link
midiguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 407
.

so from what you have seen, is there any way to make this test clip not look so blurry and spongey?
midiguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2002, 02:10   #22  |  Link
midiguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 407
Quote:
Originally posted by karl_lillevold
Without filtering there would have been blocking artifacts. It's a trade-off.
so then you are saying it does filter if it needs to? is "filtering" the same as pre-processing?
midiguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2002, 02:26   #23  |  Link
karl_lillevold
Moderator
 
karl_lillevold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,584
Quote:
Originally posted by midiguy
so from what you have seen, is there any way to make this test clip not look so blurry and spongey?
No, I am sorry, not until the next version of RealVideo. The way the post-filtering is designed makes it non-adjustable. This design is part of why RV9 works so well, but a dis-advantage is that it's non-adjustable. We spent a lot of time tuning it, and doing taste tests, to avoid any more blurriness than needed, but at the same time have no blockiness. Users really don't like blockiness.

Note that if this difficult clip had been part of a longer sequence, with both easier and harder sections, the VBR would have made this hard section look better.

Quote:
Originally posted by midiguy
so then you are saying it does filter if it needs to? is "filtering" the same as pre-processing?
no, there's no pre-processing.
__________________
This information is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, grants no rights, and reflects my personal opinion.
karl_lillevold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2002, 02:53   #24  |  Link
RadicalEd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 987
so its true that the post processing is indeed built into the codec and not just the doings of the RealOne player?
RadicalEd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2002, 07:01   #25  |  Link
midiguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 407
Quote:
Originally posted by RadicalEd
so its true that the post processing is indeed built into the codec and not just the doings of the RealOne player?
The way I see it, it has to be one of two possibilities:

1) Post-processing is built into the codec and has nothing to do with the actual Realone Player

2) Post-processing is not built into the codec and is the doing of the Realone Player --- it just can't be adjusted or tuned at all.

midiguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2002, 07:04   #26  |  Link
midiguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 407
.

by the way: good to hear that it is just the post-processing. It would be really awesome if you could change the levels of post-processing, perhaps have 6 or so levels, and the lowest level would turn off post-processing. maybe something like how ffdshow's post-processing format is set up? maybe have the 6 levels as presets for beginners, and then have an "advanced" button or whatever where people that want to go further into it can fine tune the post-processing from all angles... and maybe have an "auto detect" mode or whatever, where the player will try detecting the *best* level of post-processing for a particular clip (kinda like how it is now?)
midiguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2002, 15:25   #27  |  Link
^^-+I4004+-^^
Banned
 
^^-+I4004+-^^'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Croatia [local name:Hrvatska]
Posts: 551
smooth PLB on win98

so it looks like it's tvtool (and/or win2k) issue.....


Last edited by ^^-+I4004+-^^; 17th December 2002 at 21:31.
^^-+I4004+-^^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2002, 23:57   #28  |  Link
midiguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 407
Quote:
Originally posted by karl_lillevold
No, I am sorry, not until the next version of RealVideo. The way the post-filtering is designed makes it non-adjustable. This design is part of why RV9 works so well, but a dis-advantage is that it's non-adjustable. We spent a lot of time tuning it, and doing taste tests, to avoid any more blurriness than needed, but at the same time have no blockiness. Users really don't like blockiness.
are you saying that the next version of the RealOne Player will allow you to change the post-processing level??? I missed that little tidbit earlier. could there also be a setting to turn it off completely? that would be awesome!

also, the post-processing for that little test clip I encoded is WAY too much for my tastes.. I would rather see a few blocks and maybe some noise than anything that blurry and soft. Sometimes there are clips like that that need to be encoded, and that do not have the benefit of "easy" parts to the sequence. that is why I tihnk makign the post-processing configurable would really make a big difference and really start shit up in the video compression community
midiguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th December 2002, 00:11   #29  |  Link
karl_lillevold
Moderator
 
karl_lillevold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,584
vacation

I will be far away from Seattle until Dec 30th. I will be online once in a while, but can't promise any long and detailed posts. Happy Holidays to everyone!
__________________
This information is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, grants no rights, and reflects my personal opinion.
karl_lillevold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th December 2002, 00:49   #30  |  Link
Dark-Cracker
Registered User
 
Dark-Cracker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,195
hi,

i will try to add the support of the .avi file for input.
it normaly will add the joblist on the v1.3
for anamorphic and besweet i am not sure , i must find documentation.

and for the yv12 input i will wait producer add the support because for the moment only yuy2 was supported.

normaly added in v1.3 :

- compressibility test
- besweet more options.
- job list.
- internal subtitle
(perhaps yv12 support)
-fix bug : italic in subtitle, 4/3 smil file) .

Bye
__________________

AutoDub v1.8 : Divx3/4/5 & Xvid Video codec and .OGG/.MP3/.AC3/.WMA audio codec.
AutoRV10 v1.0 : Use RealVideo 10 Codec and support 2 Audio Streams and Subtitles.

Dark-Cracker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th December 2002, 04:33   #31  |  Link
midiguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 407
dark-cracker, your tool rules!! keep up the good work!

only one thing:

auto-crop never works for me.. it always cuts out too much into the picture, or completely misses the black bars. but I can just do a manual crop and be okay.
midiguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2002, 00:56   #32  |  Link
Valky
Registered User
 
Valky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 275
Same thing here. Great tool and only thing that doesn't work flawlessly is this auto-crop.

For me it leaves those black-bars, but that isn't so big issue.
Valky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2002, 18:40   #33  |  Link
Dark-Cracker
Registered User
 
Dark-Cracker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,195
hi,

yes the autocrop seems not always work i think this problem will be solve in the next version thank u for the bug report.

Bye, and mery chrismas, and happy new year .
__________________

AutoDub v1.8 : Divx3/4/5 & Xvid Video codec and .OGG/.MP3/.AC3/.WMA audio codec.
AutoRV10 v1.0 : Use RealVideo 10 Codec and support 2 Audio Streams and Subtitles.

Dark-Cracker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd December 2002, 20:32   #34  |  Link
baddbill
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 61
Dark Cracker any idea when AutoRV9 v1.3 will be ready? The comp test seams to be almost a neccessity. I'm really looking forward to encoding with RV9.

Thanks,
Bill
baddbill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd December 2002, 21:05   #35  |  Link
Dark-Cracker
Registered User
 
Dark-Cracker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,195
hi,

i must first finish the autodub version 1.7 before working on the next release of autorv9, i think perhaps in 3 or 4 week, a beta of the 1.3 will be publish.

Bye.
__________________

AutoDub v1.8 : Divx3/4/5 & Xvid Video codec and .OGG/.MP3/.AC3/.WMA audio codec.
AutoRV10 v1.0 : Use RealVideo 10 Codec and support 2 Audio Streams and Subtitles.

Dark-Cracker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd December 2002, 04:28   #36  |  Link
Sgt_Strider
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 243
I'm a noob to encoding and while browsing realnetwork's home page about real video 9, I came upon a very important info; "Same quality at half the bitrate of mpeg-4". When using gknot, there is an option displaying your average bitrate when you select either the divx3 or divx5 codec in the codec area. For example, let's say my average bitrate is 1608 kbit/s, does that mean when entering my average bitrate into the helix producer 804kbit/s and I'll still get the same quality?????
Sgt_Strider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd December 2002, 06:44   #37  |  Link
31 Flavas
RV10 Nerd
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally posted by Sgt_Strider

For example, let's say my average bitrate is 1608 kbit/s, does that mean when entering my average bitrate into the helix producer 804kbit/s and I'll still get the same quality?????
Do your own tests and get your own opinion on it.

But, i've done encoding myself and have seen compairison clips of xvid vs rv9 (both at same bitrate) and the rv9 clip was very obviously the better clip.

Edit: Oh yea, don't forget, at the present time rv9 is the only one that can do anamorphic encoding. hehe

Last edited by 31 Flavas; 23rd December 2002 at 09:17.
31 Flavas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2002, 01:28   #38  |  Link
Tommy Carrot
Registered User
 
Tommy Carrot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 807
Quote:
Originally posted by Sgt_Strider
I'm a noob to encoding and while browsing realnetwork's home page about real video 9, I came upon a very important info; "Same quality at half the bitrate of mpeg-4". When using gknot, there is an option displaying your average bitrate when you select either the divx3 or divx5 codec in the codec area. For example, let's say my average bitrate is 1608 kbit/s, does that mean when entering my average bitrate into the helix producer 804kbit/s and I'll still get the same quality?????
I would't say that.

The fact is, RV9 is definetaly better at low bitrates, but it is incapable to give dvd quality. It smooths out the details even in 2cd rips.
Tommy Carrot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2002, 02:02   #39  |  Link
^^-+I4004+-^^
Banned
 
^^-+I4004+-^^'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Croatia [local name:Hrvatska]
Posts: 551
and mpeg2 doesn't smooth?
have you ever compared nice clean PAL
tv signal with mpeg2 as seen in dvd player?
and you still take mpeg2 as a reference?
i regard dvd (mpeg2 stream) as less sharp than analog
PAL.......(yes i have seen quite a few decent dvd players in action...)
EVERY and ANY codec smooths.......that's why it's called
lossy compression.....(mpeg1,2,4 or rm...)
(sure,i would love to burn and watch my huff capturings...but..)

at the bitrate,rm9 is THE BEST,ie. try to make decent(!)
mpeg2 on 2 cdr's for 2h movie.......
^^-+I4004+-^^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2002, 03:53   #40  |  Link
Tommy Carrot
Registered User
 
Tommy Carrot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 807
Quote:
Originally posted by ^^-+I4004+-^^
and mpeg2 doesn't smooth?
have you ever compared nice clean PAL
tv signal with mpeg2 as seen in dvd player?
and you still take mpeg2 as a reference?
i regard dvd (mpeg2 stream) as less sharp than analog
PAL.......(yes i have seen quite a few decent dvd players in action...)
EVERY and ANY codec smooths.......that's why it's called
lossy compression.....(mpeg1,2,4 or rm...)
(sure,i would love to burn and watch my huff capturings...but..)

at the bitrate,rm9 is THE BEST,ie. try to make decent(!)
mpeg2 on 2 cdr's for 2h movie.......
No! I'm talking about Mpeg4 Advanced simple profile ofkoz. With about 1500 kbit, it's quite often gives at first sight identical result to the original. (Not always ofkoz, but often). RV9 blurs the picture at all bitrates. There is no 'same as the original' feeling.

This is all about target audiences. Realvideo has been created for streaming. Why would anybody want to stream at 1500-2000 kbit? It was optimized to <500-600 kbit, and it is very good at there.
Tommy Carrot 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 16:32.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.