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 > High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12th February 2015, 00:50   #1701  |  Link
Motenai Yoda
Registered User
 
Motenai Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 709
I'd suggest an quantizer-related modifier for deblock's, psy's and aq's strengths.
ie usually at low quant (let's say 12-) and at high quant (35+) psy-rd and psy-rdoq will attempt to better maintain fine detail that is yet well retained at low quants and will not at high quant even with psy, but instead decrease quality a lot (specially at high quant).
differently aq and deblock will be even more useful and effective from low quant to high quant.

maybe for psy a gauss-like curve with peak at about 23/24, for aq a log-like one and for deblock an exp-like one.
as for quant reference may can be take the first frame of the gop or the prev/reference I/P or the frame itself.
__________________
powered by Google Translator

Last edited by Motenai Yoda; 12th February 2015 at 00:53.
Motenai Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2015, 01:03   #1702  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by lotusgg View Post
What is the CLI for a 4:4:4 encode and what are the benefits of it?
You automatically get an encode in whatever colorspace you pass in. If you don't use y4m, you can use --input-csp to specify i422 or i444. x265 has no option to modify the colorspace.

The benefit and drawback is the same as the difference between 4:2:0 and 4:4:4 in general: Better color resolution, important for low-resolution and computer-generated video, but requires more space and doesn't really have any hardware decoding support.

Last edited by foxyshadis; 12th February 2015 at 01:10.
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2015, 01:49   #1703  |  Link
xooyoozoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motenai Yoda View Post
I'd suggest an quantizer-related modifier for deblock's, psy's and aq's strengths. [...]
HEVC, as a spec, already ties deblocking strength to quantization value, and even if you wish to change that, your only tools are extremely coarse-grained. The best available option is changing deblock for an entire slice/pic.

Psy weighs towards original energy, so it's inherently self-limiting at low-quantization. Do you have proof of how further limiting psy at low QP is helpful?

AQ weighs towards a SSIM-friendly output and effectively moves bits away from edges and towards flat regions. SSIM as a metric isn't quantization dependent, low QP flat regions still need help to prevent banding inherent in 8bit coding, and at high QPs, edges are blurry enough as it is. I'm not sure if there's anything to change unless you're proposing a fundamentally different RD metric.
xooyoozoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2015, 05:03   #1704  |  Link
jlpsvk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 240
@LigH
Waiting for you r 1.5.xxx build!!!
__________________
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, 32GB DDR4-3200 CL16, RTX 3060, 2TB NVMe PCIE4.0, NAS with 8x16TB HDD
jlpsvk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2015, 09:46   #1705  |  Link
LigH
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
 
LigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 6,753
Ladies and gentlemen, this is x265 v1.5:

x265 1.5+9-7a42ca02d198

Time to clean my archive from v1.2 builds...
__________________

New German Gleitz board
MediaFire: x264 | x265 | VPx | AOM | Xvid
LigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2015, 10:07   #1706  |  Link
jlpsvk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 240
@LigH
One question...using Main10 profile. Is that big difference between last 1.4.544 and 1.5.9 or you meant it like between initial 1.4 and 1.5?
__________________
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, 32GB DDR4-3200 CL16, RTX 3060, 2TB NVMe PCIE4.0, NAS with 8x16TB HDD
jlpsvk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2015, 10:18   #1707  |  Link
LigH
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
 
LigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 6,753
The difference between v1.4+544 and v1.5+9 is tiny. Just evolution, no revolution.
__________________

New German Gleitz board
MediaFire: x264 | x265 | VPx | AOM | Xvid
LigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2015, 10:59   #1708  |  Link
FranceBB
Broadcast Encoder
 
FranceBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea, UK
Posts: 2,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by LigH View Post
The difference between v1.4+544 and v1.5+9 is tiny. Just evolution, no revolution.
I'll try it in a few hours with a 4K content.
By the way, how do you compile it? I mean: GCC? ICC? Visual C++?
FranceBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2015, 11:03   #1709  |  Link
LigH
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
 
LigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 6,753
Many C++ compilers are supported. I used GCC 4.8.2 in MSYS.
__________________

New German Gleitz board
MediaFire: x264 | x265 | VPx | AOM | Xvid
LigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2015, 20:06   #1710  |  Link
Boulder
Pig on the wing
 
Boulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 5,718
Do you see the issue in which weighted P-frames are not used according to the log?

x265 [info]: Weighted P-Frames: Y:0.0% UV:0.0%

It stopped working at some point but I thought it was fixed. I also have this issue with my own VS2010 builds.
__________________
And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes
I'll see you on the dark side of the Moon...
Boulder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th February 2015, 01:05   #1711  |  Link
Ajvar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 115
Congratulations! I believe number 1.5 is really like a milestone like 1.0 and 2.0. Lets hope that with it the ERA OF HEVC and x265 further massive popularization will be associated.
So that anytime you google x264 vs x265 results would be separated into past (when you could call x265 an early adoptive) and Current where x265 is a full grown encoder which you can use without fear nor thinking that maybe you need to wait hence it's experimental now and future builds will be totally different.

Speaking about psy-rd default values (0.3). is it safe to assume that encoding PC game captured videos (like left 4 dead) you can set from 0.5 to 1.0 due to everything is unrealistic anyways?

Last edited by Ajvar; 13th February 2015 at 17:09.
Ajvar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th February 2015, 08:42   #1712  |  Link
LigH
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
 
LigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 6,753
If you want to be safe, don't assume ... test and tell.
__________________

New German Gleitz board
MediaFire: x264 | x265 | VPx | AOM | Xvid
LigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th February 2015, 09:12   #1713  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajvar View Post
Congratulations! I believe number 1.5 is really like a milestone like 1.0 and 2.0. Lets hope that with it the ERA OF HEVC and x265 further massive popularization will be associated.
So that anytime you google x264 vs x264 results would be separated into past (when you could call x265 an early adoptive) and Current where x265 is a full grown encoder which you can use without fear nor thinking that maybe you need to wait hence it's experimental now and future builds will be totally different.

Speaking about psy-rd default values (0.3). is it safe to assume that encoding PC game captured videos (like left 4 dead) you can set from 0.5 to 1.0 due to everything is unrealistic anyways?
I took the best 4K L4D2 recording I could find, resized to 720p and recorded with 0, .3 and 1.0 at crf 21 slow. They all look good; the main difference with stronger psy is that the 1.0 seems to cause a little more distortion of object edges and lumpy areas (not flat but not detailed) when viewing frame-by-frame, although textures might be retained a tiny bit better than 0.3. The effect is present at 0.3 but more pronounced at 1.0, but it's kind of splitting hairs. I'll be damned if I can see either effect in motion though, nor does it affect the file size in crf mode. (~0.1%)
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th February 2015, 11:14   #1714  |  Link
jlpsvk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 240
Congrats to x265 team.

With last 1.4 and with 1.5, I found preset SLOW, with DEBLOCK -3:-3 and with CRF18 completely sufficient for my 1080p encodes (bluray backups), with excellent visual quality and more than 50% size down. (i.e.: Godzilla (2014) - x264 placebo CRF20 - 5.0GB, x265 settings above - 2.1GB - audio just copied)
__________________
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, 32GB DDR4-3200 CL16, RTX 3060, 2TB NVMe PCIE4.0, NAS with 8x16TB HDD

Last edited by jlpsvk; 13th February 2015 at 11:16.
jlpsvk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th February 2015, 17:20   #1715  |  Link
Ajvar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by LigH View Post
If you want to be safe, don't assume ... test and tell.
True but I'm not experienced as much as others here to make judges. Plus even though I have fast computer my hands are not well trained to do multiple comparison encodings very fast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxyshadis View Post
I took the best 4K L4D2 recording I could find, resized to 720p and recorded with 0, .3 and 1.0 at crf 21 slow. They all look good; the main difference with stronger psy is that the 1.0 seems to cause a little more distortion of object edges and lumpy areas (not flat but not detailed) when viewing frame-by-frame, although textures might be retained a tiny bit better than 0.3. The effect is present at 0.3 but more pronounced at 1.0, but it's kind of splitting hairs. I'll be damned if I can see either effect in motion though, nor does it affect the file size in crf mode. (~0.1%)
Thank you! I believe in this case for me higher values will be better for 30fps video (very strict edges may give stroboscopic looking on low fps video while tiny bit smoothed are better) while lower values will fit 60fps one without using deblocking.
Ajvar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th February 2015, 20:58   #1716  |  Link
xooyoozoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 197
I recently tested 'tune fast-decode' and it looked, well, about as bad as expected.

I seem to recall the HM encoder heuristically disabling slice level SAO in upper-hierarchy b-frames (note: my mind may have made this up). What if x265 does something similar with deblock and SAO to make 'fast-decode' less of pyrrhic victory?
xooyoozoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th February 2015, 08:11   #1717  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajvar View Post
Thank you! I believe in this case for me higher values will be better for 30fps video (very strict edges may give stroboscopic looking on low fps video while tiny bit smoothed are better) while lower values will fit 60fps one without using deblocking.
I didn't find it reducing that effect at all; edges are still sharp, they just move in weird ways, and don't always follow the motion. At reasonable crf values the effect is very slight and only noticeable by flipping back and forth frame-by-frame, though it rises as the crf does. You still have to use something like MVFlowBlur to introduce motion blur to reduce the strobe effect.
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th February 2015, 12:43   #1718  |  Link
Ajvar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxyshadis View Post
I didn't find it reducing that effect at all; edges are still sharp, they just move in weird ways, and don't always follow the motion. At reasonable crf values the effect is very slight and only noticeable by flipping back and forth frame-by-frame, though it rises as the crf does. You still have to use something like MVFlowBlur to introduce motion blur to reduce the strobe effect.
Aaaaah, I see. Language barrier that was.
Ajvar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th February 2015, 13:56   #1719  |  Link
FranceBB
Broadcast Encoder
 
FranceBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea, UK
Posts: 2,883
Comparison between 1.4 and 1.5:

first of all, with a silly encoding like:

Main10 profile, Level-5, WPP Streams: 34, frame threads: 2, pool: 4, Internal BitDepth: 10, CTU Size: 64, RQT depth inter: 1 RQT depth intra: 1, ME: hex, range: 57, subpel: 2, merge: 2, keyframe min: 23, max: 250, scenecut: 40, lookahead: 20, bframes: 4, badapt: 2, b-pyramid: 1, weightp: 1, weightb: 1, refs: 3, rate control: CRF 25, AQ-Strength: 1.0, CUTree: 1, tools: rd=3
on a 4K content (file master upscaled) 23,976 fps progressive, it took quite the same with 1.5 version (I mean, encoding time), but on playback, 1.5 version was very slight.
On a 6 core AMD without GPU acceleration (not supported by nvidia gtx650) with 6 MB of cache and 3.4 GHz, 1.4 version was not playable, while 1.5 version was just a bit jerky, so that's a very good performance boost.

As to the quality, they look the same, but I made some test in order to see differences with defaults settings:

Encoding with:
--crf 25 --profile main10 --preset medium

Video lenght: 24 minutes
Resolution: 3840x2160 (file master upscaled)
fps: 23,976 progressive

1.4 version: 1013 MB -- 1.5 version: 724 MB

Detail loss? Not at all! (or should I say "more or less"? xD)

Screen: https://mega.co.nz/#!SUljXCwL!bU_BSc...NSO0gCs66ifp_I

Borders around the right ear on the second image are a little bit worst in 1.5 version. Plus, there is a little bit haloing in 1.5 version, but it's just a little bit.
As to the blocking on the dark background, it's the same both in 1.4 and 1.5 due to crf 25 setting.
Anyway... c'mon, 24 minutes at 4K resolutions, 10bit, 23,976 with a watchable quality in just 724 MB it's a very good thing.

So... very good improvement with this new version 1.5. I think we are getting closer and closer to a good codec

By the way, I know it's still early to talk about it, but... how about an Open CL x265 encoding? It would speed everything up.
FranceBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th February 2015, 01:30   #1720  |  Link
jkauff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 491
The latest Handbrake nightly includes x265 1.5. For my first experiment with HEVC, I encoded a 35GB Blu-ray movie using the default settings and CRF 18 Slow. Took over two hours on a 4790K running at 4400, but the resulting file was less than a GB in size with no discernible quality loss. Very, very impressive.

Next step is to see how high I can go with CRF without losing visible quality.

Last edited by jkauff; 15th February 2015 at 01:33.
jkauff 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 07:45.


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