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 7th July 2006, 19:27   #41  |  Link
Revgen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Near LA, California, USA
Posts: 1,545
Are there any plans for a 2-pass enabled build?

I know it's summer, so I'm not expecting miracles, but it would be nice to know if it's on the radar.

Thanks
__________________
Pirate: Now how would you like to die? Would you like to have your head chopped off or be burned at the stake?

Curly: Burned at the stake!

Moe: Why?

Curly: A hot steak is always better than a cold chop.
Revgen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2006, 09:42   #42  |  Link
hpn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 191
Just did a short 400 frames test with interlaced DV footage + rev.574 and enabling the new option --interlaced (introduced in rev570)

x264.exe -p 1 -B 1000 -r 5 --mixed-refs --no-fast-pskip -b 3 --b-pyramid -w --bime --weightb -m 6 -t 1 -A none -8 --me umh --progress --interlaced -o NUL b.avs

Looks promising and Mplayer plays it almost fine, but with one frame (No 40) completely borked, plus when I switch to the mplayer's output I see every second frame (or field?) it keeps repeating the message:
[h264 @ 00AE6660]MBAFF + spatial direct mode is not implemented

Neither MPC nor even VLC media player (??) was able to play the interlaced encode out of the box (playing a grey screen). Guess I have to change some of the players options or/and reinstall some broken software.
The same encode without --interlaced is perfect as usual. Obviously we'll also have perfect interlaced support soon

Last edited by hpn; 1st October 2006 at 09:53.
hpn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2006, 09:52   #43  |  Link
Manao
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: France
Posts: 2,856
hpn : the error message you get is explicit : libavcodec doesn't support all mbaff does, and particularly it doesn't the --direct spatial option. So use --direct temporal in your commandline ( or don't use bframes ).
__________________
Manao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2006, 10:02   #44  |  Link
akupenguin
x264 developer
 
akupenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,392
The error message is misleading. libavcodec does support the subset of MBAFF that x264 currently generates, but it can't know just from looking at the headers that the file uses that subset.
And x264 does not support temporal direct w/ MBAFF.
(Because the MBAFF samples that I had when writing lavc were temporal, but when when I get to choose the method spatial is better and easier)
akupenguin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2006, 10:27   #45  |  Link
hpn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manao View Post
or don't use bframes
Correct. Without bframes the small glitch at frame 40 dissapeared and the mplayer error message is gone.

x264.exe -p 1 -B 1000 -r 5 --mixed-refs --no-fast-pskip -w -m 6 -t 1 -A none -8 --me umh --interlaced --progress -o NUL b.avs
hpn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2006, 11:56   #46  |  Link
Jay Bee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 451
I did some testing using hpn's command lines. The problem is I couldn't get CoreAVC to do any deinterlacing on the resulting file. This should usually happen automatically and does with other interlaced AVC files that I've tried. Any ideas what the problem may be?
Jay Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd October 2006, 17:36   #47  |  Link
fields_g
x264... Brilliant!
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 167
First off, I realize how interlaced support is in its infancy. Knowing that, I was wondering if anyone would be willing to comment about x264 taking VFR input and keeping the progressive and interlaced frames the same as the source.

Would this ever be a possibility?
What still needs to be accomplished before this could happen (both x264 and MeGUI sides)?

Thanks for the interlaced support so far. I work with lots of DV footage and this will instantly be useful.
fields_g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd October 2006, 18:08   #48  |  Link
akupenguin
x264 developer
 
akupenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,392
For now, x264 doesn't support interlaced and progressive frames in the same encode. Enabling interlaced mode will penalize the compression of any progressive parts. But for whenever adaption is finished:

First, make sure your VFR content is really part interlaced. If it's mixed 30p and telecine, then interlaced encoding is not the answer.
Then, run your favourite ivtc filter to recover the progressive parts while not touching the interlaced parts. Pass the filtered video to some future version of x264 --interlaced. Remux the output file to include VFR timestamps (which were generated by the ivtc).
MeGUI would need to add timestamp remuxing part.
akupenguin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2006, 20:08   #49  |  Link
dattrax
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 110
field order

I had a quick look at the patch, but I couldn't see whether it coded as top or bottom field first. Anyone have any idea?

Jim
dattrax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2006, 22:25   #50  |  Link
akupenguin
x264 developer
 
akupenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,392
Neither. Field order is not specified, as it makes no difference to MBAFF compression. Yes, I'll add it sometime for the benefit of media players without auto-detection.
akupenguin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th October 2006, 03:39   #51  |  Link
Malow
In bytes we trust
 
Malow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Torres Beach, Brazil
Posts: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Bee View Post
I did some testing using hpn's command lines. The problem is I couldn't get CoreAVC to do any deinterlacing on the resulting file. This should usually happen automatically and does with other interlaced AVC files that I've tried. Any ideas what the problem may be?
i have same prob. tried a lot of options, conf, containers, none of them do a deinterlace.

using mainconcept encoder, the interlaced content works fine with "diresctshow deinterlace"

is not a flag or somethign missing in the file? how coreavc know if is interlaced?

Last edited by Malow; 6th October 2006 at 03:45.
Malow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th October 2006, 07:32   #52  |  Link
Jay Bee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malow View Post
i have same prob. tried a lot of options, conf, containers, none of them do a deinterlace.

using mainconcept encoder, the interlaced content works fine with "diresctshow deinterlace"

is not a flag or somethign missing in the file? how coreavc know if is interlaced?
After further testing I've found that the mainconcept encoder displays the same behaviour as x264 when set to MBAFF. So maybe the problem is with CoreAVC?
Jay Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th October 2006, 08:19   #53  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,558
MBAFF might be one of their big 1.2 features, then. It's a lot more complex than PAFF, unless you were to just deinterlace all of any frame that has any MBAFF blocks in it (which is kind of silly).
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th October 2006, 09:17   #54  |  Link
Jay Bee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 451
MBAFF was actually the big 1.1 feature. I just had a look at the BBC HD MBAFF test clips to confirm they actually are automatically deinterlaced by CoreAVC. What I found is that I couldn't tell any difference in playback between disabling deinterlacing and setting any of the deinterlacing modes, the picture looked fine either way.

Does this mean the clips aren't really interlaced? CoreAVC doesn't really support MBAFF deinterlacing? Both? Beats me.
Jay Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th October 2006, 19:27   #55  |  Link
Malow
In bytes we trust
 
Malow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Torres Beach, Brazil
Posts: 279
if video is really interlaced, the diference shoud "pop" in your eyes.

as i only work here with interlaced video, a proper BOBed video is a must... otherway, you will have a blurred or "lined" (i dont know the word.. ) video instead a "60fps look" smooth video...
Malow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th October 2006, 19:35   #56  |  Link
Malow
In bytes we trust
 
Malow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Torres Beach, Brazil
Posts: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by fields_g View Post
I work with lots of DV footage and this will instantly be useful.
me too.
Malow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th October 2006, 20:23   #57  |  Link
Jay Bee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malow View Post
if video is really interlaced, the diference shoud "pop" in your eyes.

as i only work here with interlaced video, a proper BOBed video is a must... otherway, you will have a blurred or "lined" (i dont know the word.. ) video instead a "60fps look" smooth video...
Yes, the motion smoothness is the exact reason I'm interested in interlaced encoding and I often wonder why so many people don't seem to mind 25 fps jerkyness. But concerning the BBC clips I mentioned above I simply don't have the CPU power to see if they are really smooth or not. They run at about 20 fps for me so I don't know if they go up to 50 or only to 25 on faster machines.
Jay Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th October 2006, 20:26   #58  |  Link
Sharktooth
Mr. Sandman
 
Sharktooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Haddonfield, IL
Posts: 11,768
Well, the interlaced effect on motion is a sort of motion blur...
You dont need interlacing to "reproduce" that smooth motion effect...
Interlaced is really born as a sort of analog compression.
Sharktooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th October 2006, 21:05   #59  |  Link
Jay Bee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 451
Motion blur? Isn't it the opposite i.e. sharp and double frame-rate instead of blury and same frame-rate? Or do you mean blurry compared to 50 progressive fps?

What I meant is that most of the content I want to encode is inerlaced and I want to encode it without changing the resolution and that includes the temporal resolution, not just the spatial resolution. Using an advanced adaptive bobber before encoding would be one way to do this but this would need a much higher bitrate than just keeping it interlaced and letting the playback software deal with the deinterlacing.

The standard on the net seems to be to use a blend-type deinterlacer before encoding which IMO makes motion too jerky for fast-paced sports. One example would be the football torrents that were around during the World Cup, I found them hard to watch compared to live TV because the ball is just too fast for 25 fps.
Jay Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st October 2006, 04:03   #60  |  Link
Jay Bee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Me View Post
I did some testing using hpn's command lines. The problem is I couldn't get CoreAVC to do any deinterlacing on the resulting file. This should usually happen automatically and does with other interlaced AVC files that I've tried. Any ideas what the problem may be?
I found a workaround that makes me believe the problem is more likely to be with CoreAVC than with x264.

Quote:
Originally Posted by akupenguin View Post
Neither. Field order is not specified, as it makes no difference to MBAFF compression.
Could you explain what this means? On all the deinterlacers I've tried on x264 interlaced files, switching the field order does make a difference. Also, I thought x264 does pure interlaced, not MBAFF? Thanks for any answers.
Jay Bee 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 23:09.


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