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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 16th January 2004, 12:47   #321  |  Link
m0rtal
open source addict
 
m0rtal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Yalta, Ukraine
Posts: 94
Re: Re: b-frames

Quote:
Originally posted by symonjfox
The bad things I think are 2:
1- Maybe the processing power needed for decode 20 b frames is greater that decode mixed b and p frames, I think.
To the other side, these frames are smaller (lower bitrate) and should take less power to decode ... I don't know. Maybe someone more technical than me could answer.
I think in our new millenium it's not so important anymore

Quote:
2- Maybe there should be any problems with standalones, they sometimes have trouble with more than 1 b frame, with 20 they get crazy
is don't bother me much - I'm using matroska container, which is currently not supported by standalones, so I don't care
__________________
Software is like sex - better when it's free!
m0rtal is offline  
Old 16th January 2004, 13:09   #322  |  Link
Manao
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: France
Posts: 2,856
@micro : I would say VDubMod 1.5.10 is guilty. It is highly unstable. I now use VDubMod 1.5.4 for compressing, and 1.5.10 for muxing into ogm / mkv.
Manao is offline  
Old 16th January 2004, 19:22   #323  |  Link
symonjfox
IUUULEEEENZ
 
symonjfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Italy
Posts: 452
Re: Re: Re: b-frames

Quote:
Originally posted by m0rtal I think in our new millenium it's not so important anymore
Instead I think it's important, because much people still have an old computer, and some standalones have not enough power to decode some kind of streams.
Quote:
is don't bother me much - I'm using matroska container, which is currently not supported by standalones, so I don't care
First or later I really think that everyone of us will have a standalone. IMO it's important create streams playable NOW, in the FUTURE, and EVERYWHERE!

Maybe not all have my targets of life, and use Xvid for the reasons I use it. But I cooperate to grow all togheter.
__________________
PC1:AMD Athlon II x4, 4GB DDR2, Ati Radeon 4830, 4 hard disks
symonjfox is offline  
Old 16th January 2004, 19:37   #324  |  Link
Heini011
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 148
hi,

my problem with virtualdubmod 1.5.4.1 crash was NOT xvid's fault! i had used to many filter instances in my avisynth script.

i have done 2 large 2-pass conversions in batch mode now without any problem.

greetings, heini011.
Heini011 is offline  
Old 17th January 2004, 02:17   #325  |  Link
mikeX
yakisoooobaaa!!
 
mikeX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Greece
Posts: 329
nice to see a P4 crash come in to play

i had crashes without job control iirc (i'm not really sure)
anyway things so far indicate it's not xvid related

btw how does everybody run such overclocked systems??? i try raising my FSB a few Hz and i can't even get into windows, does my cooler suck that bad?...
mikeX is offline  
Old 17th January 2004, 02:55   #326  |  Link
Blue_MiSfit
Derek Prestegard IRL
 
Blue_MiSfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,988
Quote:
btw how does everybody run such overclocked systems??? i try raising my FSB a few Hz and i can't even get into windows, does my cooler suck that bad?...
a little OT, but a brief explanation

your ram probably sucks. If (for example) you are running a palomino core athlon XP (anything before the 2500+), it rides a 266mhz DDR bus. In this situation, your ram is likely DDR266(pc2100), which runs at a clock frequency of 133mhz (266ddr). Most DDR266 doesnt tolerate overclocking very well, especially at low latencies. I run DDR400 memory, and my Barton core athlon xp, which operates at at 333mhz ddr bus by default can run at 200mhz perfectly.

It all depends on how good your CPU, cooler, motherboard, and RAM are.
If you have an athlonXP, try boosting your clock multiplier a bit, as this doesnt affect your fsb speeds at all, but rather the resultant clock frequency of your cpu.

sorry about being OT, but any scent of overclocking leaves me aroused lol...

peace
~misfit
__________________
These are all my personal statements, not those of my employer :)
Blue_MiSfit is offline  
Old 17th January 2004, 10:21   #327  |  Link
alexnoe
Banned
 
alexnoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,737
Blue_MiSfit:
The Kingston DDR266 CL2 memory I used some time ago tolerated 152 MHz (b0rks at 153), and the Infineon DDR333 memory I know have tolerates 188 MHz (did not test more). So you are even more right with 'it depends on the memory you have'
alexnoe is offline  
Old 17th January 2004, 13:38   #328  |  Link
kadajawi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 81
My Infineon PC2700 doesn't take very much... as soon as I raise the FSB I get problems with memtest86 in one test after a few hours... how many errors and how long it takes depends on the OC (well, other than that its stable... up to 400 MHz (didn't test more). I can raise the RAM voltage for a bit of stability.
Anyway, my 1700+ CPU runs at 2600+. Could do 2700+, but I would need to raise voltage quite a bit. Well, it really depends on your cooling, your CPU (every CPU is different) and your other hardware, mainly board and RAM.
But I agree this is the wrong place to discuss about overclocking
kadajawi is offline  
Old 17th January 2004, 21:46   #329  |  Link
kadajawi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 81
I noticed that while playback using Windows Media Player or Zoom Player XviD a video gets much brighter. The same video in huffyuv looks much darker, even if the video is encoded using quant 1 etc. So I tried loading it into VirtualDubMod, and voila, it looks as dark and detailed as it should. I've tried XviD and ffdshow, no difference. Any idea?

Doing side by side comparison of the XviD video (using default settings and "check everything you can" setting) and huffyuv using VDM I also noticed that the video got a greenish tint, a bit muddy, a bit darker. But really not very much...
kadajawi is offline  
Old 17th January 2004, 21:55   #330  |  Link
Koepi
Moderator
 
Koepi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,454
Search for your overlay colour controls and you'll see that the drivers set the brightness to a higher value.

Koepi
Koepi is offline  
Old 17th January 2004, 23:03   #331  |  Link
kadajawi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 81
That solved it. Though I never changed that. But I noticed that default with the latest NVidia is 114%. Strange.
kadajawi is offline  
Old 18th January 2004, 14:15   #332  |  Link
vip
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Belarus
Posts: 27
Koepi,
i've tried vdubmod 1.5.4.1 as you suggested before and it crashes too, regular vdub crashes as well... After flushing avisynth plugin folder as Wilbert suggested in this thread and leaving there only mpeg2dec3, undot and convolution3d vdubmod dont crash anymore... This is a bit weird 'cos i have used them all the time so they couldnt be the real reason of vdubmod crashes...
vip is offline  
Old 18th January 2004, 16:29   #333  |  Link
Flipin
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 5
kadajawi,
The nvidia overlay "problem" is far stranger than 114%. With both of my nvidia cards (GF3, GF4), the image is actually darker than the original when everything is set to 100%. It's a sort of a level cut-off so everything dark is even darker, if not black. Also the colours are a bit pinkish/bluish. As far as I can tell, the defaults are trying to emulate the TV colour spectrum when using the default 6500/9300 colour temperatures on your CRT.
That's fine as long you use the defaults, but I'm using custom colour settings that makes even 9300k look greenish warm. So in my case, nvidia's settings will do more harm than good.
Some ways of fixing this: use Zoomplayer and use the "Use color control interface" and reset the colours.. It'll give you the original colours. Another way of fixing it is by using VMR9. I've heard some ppl. complaining that it's crappy quality but that's only because it doesn't support I420, YV12,YUY2,UYVY or RGB output properly (bad conversion?). They all give various degrees of green or pink for some reason. It only works perfectly is when using YVYU output (slow) in ffdshow. This of course probably depends on your GFX and it's texture rendering capabilities but even now I'm using this on my GF4 and Radeon7000 on another comp. without problems.
The resize quality is slightly better with VMR9 than on nvidia overlay, that being the only difference between using zoomplayer's colour adjustments and VMR9. (+ some bugs with multiple monitors when using nvidia overlay, as zoomplayer crashes)

Hope this helps,
Flipin
Flipin is offline  
Old 19th January 2004, 10:02   #334  |  Link
begu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Finland
Posts: 79
Re: b-frames

Quote:
Originally posted by m0rtal
recently I've tested b-frames on 1cd encode
settings was
max consecutive bvops: 20
bvop sensivity (for movie): 3
bvop sensivity (for credits): 5
result was amazing
codec often inserts all 20 b-frames in a row, and it doesn't affect quality! I should consider to increase "max consecutive bvops" to 30
Well what values can be used in bvop sensitivity. I tried 20 and it did cause more bframes. I tried even 60 and maybe got few more. Is there any trick to do the b-frame positioning in the stream in the same way than ffvfw? It places frames like this (when using 3 bframes):
i p bbb p bbb p bbb p bbb ...
But I have found that xvid chooses not always use 3 consecutive, like this:
i p bb p bbb p bbb p bb p bb p b p bbb ...

I have not tested if I use 100 for sensitivity, maybe then it will place always 3 b-frames in row.

Are the sensitivities in different zones somehow dependant from each other, like m0rtal used 3 and 5 ?
begu is offline  
Old 19th January 2004, 10:11   #335  |  Link
m0rtal
open source addict
 
m0rtal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Yalta, Ukraine
Posts: 94
Re: Re: b-frames

Quote:
Originally posted by begu
Well what values can be used in bvop sensitivity. I tried 20 and it did cause more bframes. I tried even 60 and maybe got few more. Is there any trick to do the b-frame positioning in the stream in the same way than ffvfw? It places frames like this (when using 3 bframes):
i p bbb p bbb p bbb p bbb ...
But I have found that xvid chooses not always use 3 consecutive, like this:
i p bb p bbb p bbb p bb p bb p b p bbb ...

I have not tested if I use 100 for sensitivity, maybe then it will place always 3 b-frames in row.

Are the sensitivities in different zones somehow dependant from each other, like m0rtal used 3 and 5 ?
well, it's almost useless to have 3 consecutive b-frames and sensivity @ 20 or 60 - you can't get more than 3 frames in a row, so why bother? if you want to have more b-frames, you should try increasing "max consecutive" value.
and about b-frames in zones... why not? credits are less important to me, that's why I increase sensitivity... and got more b-frames comparing to main movie.
__________________
Software is like sex - better when it's free!
m0rtal is offline  
Old 19th January 2004, 13:53   #336  |  Link
begu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Finland
Posts: 79
Well, actually I meant that if I set max consecutive b-frames to 3, in the result I get something between 1-3 consecutive b-frames.
Like previous post:
i p bb p bbb p b p b p bb p bbb p bbb .. so on.
I get smooth results using ffvfw and 3 b-frames, and I get:
i p bbb p bbb p bbb p bbb .. so on.
See, there isn't always 3 consecutive b-frames using xvid.

But maybe it is not harmful always having 3 b-frames in a row. The encoder seems to make good decisions, if using a b frame or not.
The behaviour between the codes just made me to think is there possible the xvid to produce always 3 (or more) b-frames in a row. I just then compare the result and see, if there is any difference. Just trust Your own eyes
begu is offline  
Old 19th January 2004, 14:02   #337  |  Link
m0rtal
open source addict
 
m0rtal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Yalta, Ukraine
Posts: 94
begu
I think that codec makes it's own decisions regarding b-frames, thus inserting from 1 to n b-frames standing upon it's own algorythm.
but I think that it is possible to enforce codec to always insert as much b-frames as user want... good proposal for developers!
__________________
Software is like sex - better when it's free!
m0rtal is offline  
Old 19th January 2004, 14:43   #338  |  Link
Koepi
Moderator
 
Koepi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,454
If you want to have "constant bframes" in a row you just need to set the bframe sensitivity to i.e. 100 or more - the codec will then be forced to nearly always use the IPBBBPBBB scheme.

(This isn't good for quality and/or compressability though.)

Regards
Koepi
Koepi is offline  
Old 20th January 2004, 10:07   #339  |  Link
begu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Finland
Posts: 79
Thanks Koepi, that was just the idea, I was looking.
Now, there is one question more.

If I want better quality out of b-frames, I must lower their quantizers. I did a test, where I did set the quantizer ratio to 1.00 and the offset to 0.

In the result I got always the same quantizer for the b-frame than for the p-frame. The result did have better quality compared to default 1.50 / 1.00. And the frame size in kb was still lower in b- than p-frame. And ofcourse the above will happen.

But the question is, how does the b-frame image quality compare to the p-frame if their quantizers are the same? Like quantizer 3 for both. The b-frame uses little less kb, but will it contain as much quality as p-frame?

I ask this because in default setting the b-frame contains less image quality than p-frame (due to the quantizer difference). And I need as much image quality as possible. So using the same image quality for b- and p-frames would be the optimal thing. So should the quantizer of the b-frame be the same or maybe one notch higher than the quantizer of p-frame to obtain the same quality? Or maybe the b-frame should be quantizer of one notch lower than p-frame. That would be overkill I think, right? (also maybe it is not possible, it would need smaller than 1.00 for ratio, maybe it works, hmm) [sorry for bad english]

I have noticed, that if I use the default 1.50 / 1.00 together with 2 or 3 consecutive b-frames, the quality slightly pumps up and down in the cycle of p- and b-frames. I need to get smooth quality, and it seems that using same quantizer will improve it.

So in the end, I may have answered to my own question. But maybe someone more professional could give an aspect too.

Last edited by begu; 20th January 2004 at 10:11.
begu is offline  
Old 20th January 2004, 10:38   #340  |  Link
Selur
Registered User
 
Selur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,259
just wondering did anyone try a quantizer ratio of 0.75 for bframes ?

Cu Selur
Selur is offline  
Closed Thread

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 13:13.


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