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 28th March 2008, 13:40   #61  |  Link
Sharktooth
Mr. Sandman
 
Sharktooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Haddonfield, IL
Posts: 11,768
not spec compliant.
Sharktooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th March 2008, 13:46   #62  |  Link
kypec
User of free A/V tools
 
kypec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SK
Posts: 826
@squid_80: any plans on updating xvid_encraw so that there'll be new separate CLI option switch for VAQ instead of lumimasking one?
kypec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th March 2008, 13:50   #63  |  Link
Sharktooth
Mr. Sandman
 
Sharktooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Haddonfield, IL
Posts: 11,768
you cant have VAQ and lumimaksing togheter... and lumimasking sux... so why you need a "separate" option?
Sharktooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th March 2008, 17:23   #64  |  Link
plugh
A hollow voice says
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 269
Sort of prompted by this thread, I've been pondering lumi-masking, and experimenting via the HVS plugin.

In the process, I came across something that makes me question the basic approach of the various implimentations, which is to act on the basis of (ie as a function of) the 'Y' component. 'Y', the luma component, is generally thought of as the gray scale part of an image, where large values for Y are brighter than small values.

But a simple experiment I did the other days makes me wonder. I was looking at scenes where xvid seems to produce blocky results (darker colored areas) on my TV and adjusted the TV settings to turn color off.

Now my thinking was that doing this would allow me to 'see' the luma component. Further, my thinking was that this would simply remove the coloration from the image, leaving me with just the (I'm grasping for words) lumimance / intensity / brightness / part of the image.

And finally, my thinking was that the above two sentences say the same thing. When I turned the color off it became immediately apparent that they are NOT.

One case that comes to mind was a segment from the movie Event Horizon, showing the ship in the clouds of Neptune's blue-tinted light. This was a darkish scene, everything shades of blue, the clouds of varying brightness - until I turned the color off.

Doing so made a large portion of the (blocky) clouds basically disappear. Huh? I said.

I tried similar experiements with other scenes - primarily blueish and redish images showing blockiness - and the results were quite consistant. Turning the color off made these areas largely black, rather that some low intensity gray as I expected.

This led to another experiment which was simply to watch some xvid encodes with TV color turned off vs on. What I observed was that nearly all the blockiness, moving walls, contours, etc, in my encodes vanished when the color was suppressed.

These observations triggerred a slew of thought processes, among them:

-The 'gray scale' 'Y' luma component does not strictly relate to the perceived brightness of a color TV picture. As such, using the 'Y' value as the basis for Adaptive Quant may be missing the boat.

-My efforts to combat 'blockiness' in my xvid encodes needs to focus on the chroma components rather than the luma...

Comments?

FYI - I'm toying with the idea of using the 'L' value from the HSL colorspace rather than 'Y' for AQ decision making...

Comments?

Last edited by plugh; 28th March 2008 at 17:27.
plugh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th March 2008, 20:29   #65  |  Link
kypec
User of free A/V tools
 
kypec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SK
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharktooth View Post
you can't have VAQ and lumimasking together...
Well, I didn't know that before, therefore I was asking for distinguishing these two options.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharktooth View Post
and lumimasking sux... so why you need a "separate" option?
OK, now I see there's no need for "separate" option. Just would be nice if VAQ method was invoked through -vaq switch so as not be confused in the future when editing my scripts. Anyway, good comments can always help with such problem
kypec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th March 2008, 21:13   #66  |  Link
kypec
User of free A/V tools
 
kypec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SK
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizboy11 View Post
Build:
http://www.fileducky.com/qRILYtae/

It's built with pthreads enabled.
Does that mean your build enables SMP (multithreaded) encoding?
If yes could you please upload it somewhere else?
The link doesn't work for me at all.
kypec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2008, 01:36   #67  |  Link
Ranguvar
Registered User
 
Ranguvar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ::1
Posts: 1,236
kypec, get a recent multithreaded build from the Multithreaded Xvid thread (a few pages back). Then copy the xvidcore.dll in the very first post in this thread to overwrite your old one. (Typically: C:\WINDOWS\system32\)
Ranguvar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2008, 12:27   #68  |  Link
kypec
User of free A/V tools
 
kypec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SK
Posts: 826
The most recent MT build I found is this archive xvid.cvs.head.MTK.2007.07.25.7z which contains 4 files:
  • xvid.ax 81 920 bytes 03.11.2006
  • xvidcore.dll 1 559 040 bytes 25.07.2007
  • xvidvfw.dll 282 624 bytes 10.03.2007
  • xvid.inf 2 963 bytes 30.05.2004
I've downloaded also the VAQ patch from the very first post in this thread xvidcore.dll 750 400 bytes. Why is there such huge difference in file size when only small routine (though I'm not an xvid expert, just average programmer guy) was replaced? That 750 kB DLL file seems more like an ordinary single threaded build but I might be wrong. I'll try it and see for myself.
kypec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th March 2008, 19:41   #69  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by kypec View Post
The most recent MT build I found is this archive xvid.cvs.head.MTK.2007.07.25.7z which contains 4 files:
  • xvid.ax 81 920 bytes 03.11.2006
  • xvidcore.dll 1 559 040 bytes 25.07.2007
  • xvidvfw.dll 282 624 bytes 10.03.2007
  • xvid.inf 2 963 bytes 30.05.2004
I've downloaded also the VAQ patch from the very first post in this thread xvidcore.dll 750 400 bytes. Why is there such huge difference in file size when only small routine (though I'm not an xvid expert, just average programmer guy) was replaced? That 750 kB DLL file seems more like an ordinary single threaded build but I might be wrong. I'll try it and see for myself.
It might have been compiled with different compiler settings.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2008, 23:16   #70  |  Link
Ranguvar
Registered User
 
Ranguvar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ::1
Posts: 1,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by kypec View Post
The most recent MT build I found is this archive xvid.cvs.head.MTK.2007.07.25.7z which contains 4 files:
  • xvid.ax 81 920 bytes 03.11.2006
  • xvidcore.dll 1 559 040 bytes 25.07.2007
  • xvidvfw.dll 282 624 bytes 10.03.2007
  • xvid.inf 2 963 bytes 30.05.2004
I've downloaded also the VAQ patch from the very first post in this thread xvidcore.dll 750 400 bytes. Why is there such huge difference in file size when only small routine (though I'm not an xvid expert, just average programmer guy) was replaced? That 750 kB DLL file seems more like an ordinary single threaded build but I might be wrong. I'll try it and see for myself.
February 9th, 2008 build: http://rapidshare.com/files/90468184...7-09022008.exe
Ranguvar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2008, 03:14   #71  |  Link
TheRyuu
warpsharpened
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
It might have been compiled with different compiler settings.
IIRC, it was compiled with the profiles or something which makes file size jump up. I also believe it was compiled with ICL9/10 although I'm not sure on that.

And thus the MTK in the file name. I forget what it means, but it's the reason for the huge file.
TheRyuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2008, 04:05   #72  |  Link
TheRyuu
warpsharpened
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 787
Here's the latest xvid source-code with the latest VAQ patch.
Built with p-thread support so it's SMP enabled.

Xvid_20080401_VAQ.rar
TheRyuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2008, 07:54   #73  |  Link
Gromozeka
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizboy11 View Post
Here's the latest xvid source-code with the latest VAQ patch.
Built with p-thread support so it's SMP enabled.

Xvid_20080401_VAQ.rar
But what differences from Jawor's build?
Xvid 1.2.-127, Jawor's build with DivX profiles and VAQ (28.02.2008)
http://jawormat.republika.pl/xvid.html
Gromozeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2008, 09:44   #74  |  Link
olnima
Registered User
 
olnima's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizboy11 View Post
Here's the latest xvid source-code with the latest VAQ patch.
Built with p-thread support so it's SMP enabled.

Xvid_20080401_VAQ.rar
Hi wizboy,
there seems to be something borked in your latest xvid-version. After installing it, it doesn't show off in virtualdub. Your version posted in this thread from 22nd feb. (http://www.fileducky.com/qRILYtae/) does.

Olnima
olnima is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2008, 10:57   #75  |  Link
LeXXuz
21 years and counting...
 
LeXXuz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 716
Quote:
Originally Posted by olnima View Post
Hi wizboy,
there seems to be something borked in your latest xvid-version. After installing it, it doesn't show off in virtualdub. Your version posted in this thread from 22nd feb. (http://www.fileducky.com/qRILYtae/) does.

Olnima
Jep and it cant be used with encraw either.
LeXXuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2008, 11:03   #76  |  Link
kypec
User of free A/V tools
 
kypec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SK
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranguvar View Post
Did YOU build it (compiled the sources) personally? If not then why you just don't post the original URL link to file instead?
kypec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2008, 20:05   #77  |  Link
Ranguvar
Registered User
 
Ranguvar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ::1
Posts: 1,236
I did not build it, and that is the URL that was given.

I use that build, with the VAQ xvidcore.dll, myself. Until I start compiling my own Xvid when my RAM gets shipped back.
Ranguvar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2008, 22:21   #78  |  Link
G_M_C
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gromozeka View Post
But what differences from Jawor's build?
Xvid 1.2.-127, Jawor's build with DivX profiles and VAQ (28.02.2008)
http://jawormat.republika.pl/xvid.html
Was finaly able to update my Xvid. One question though: Do i ENable or DISable "adaptive quantization" in the options screen to make use of Dark Shikari's VAQ ?

(some earlier post suggested DISableing, others mentioned ENabling .. i'm confused : )

Last edited by G_M_C; 1st April 2008 at 22:23.
G_M_C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2008, 22:28   #79  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by G_M_C View Post
Was finaly able to update my Xvid. One question though: Do i ENable or DISable "adaptive quantization" in the options screen to make use of Dark Shikari's VAQ ?

(some earlier post suggested DISableing, others mentioned ENabling .. i'm confused : )
Enable...
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2008, 03:36   #80  |  Link
TheRyuu
warpsharpened
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 787
Crap, I broke that build
Don't use it.
TheRyuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
xvid aq, xvid vaq

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 15:17.


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