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. |
16th January 2004, 12:47 | #321 | Link | ||
open source addict
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Yalta, Ukraine
Posts: 94
|
Re: Re: b-frames
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Software is like sex - better when it's free! |
||
16th January 2004, 19:22 | #323 | Link | ||
IUUULEEEENZ
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Italy
Posts: 452
|
Re: Re: Re: b-frames
Quote:
Quote:
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 |
||
16th January 2004, 19:37 | #324 | Link |
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. |
17th January 2004, 02:17 | #325 | Link |
yakisoooobaaa!!
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?... |
17th January 2004, 02:55 | #326 | Link | |
Derek Prestegard IRL
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,988
|
Quote:
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 :) |
|
17th January 2004, 10:21 | #327 | Link |
Banned
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' |
17th January 2004, 13:38 | #328 | Link |
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 |
17th January 2004, 21:46 | #329 | Link |
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... |
17th January 2004, 21:55 | #330 | Link |
Moderator
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's new media development site |
18th January 2004, 14:15 | #332 | Link |
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... |
18th January 2004, 16:29 | #333 | Link |
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 |
19th January 2004, 10:02 | #334 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Finland
Posts: 79
|
Re: b-frames
Quote:
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 ? |
|
19th January 2004, 10:11 | #335 | Link | |
open source addict
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Yalta, Ukraine
Posts: 94
|
Re: Re: b-frames
Quote:
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! |
|
19th January 2004, 13:53 | #336 | Link |
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 |
19th January 2004, 14:02 | #337 | Link |
open source addict
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! |
19th January 2004, 14:43 | #338 | Link |
Moderator
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's new media development site |
20th January 2004, 10:07 | #339 | Link |
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. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|