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. |
9th December 2016, 18:55 | #121 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 201
|
Not read it yet, but that appears to be the same group that put out a very early analysis of VP9, they took a copy of the git master branch the day that the format was finalized and talked about it as if it was released code. I think it was over a year later before there was an official VP9 release.
edit: the previous work I refer to: http://iphome.hhi.de/marpe/download/...3_preprint.pdf Last edited by dapperdan; 9th December 2016 at 19:08. |
10th December 2016, 09:30 | #122 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,926
|
Not sure what's so surprising the coding tools are not that efficient yet (but in case of AV1 also not fully finalized and frozen yet) but therefore also the complexity is not as high and overall lower nothing unexpected to other studies also that the RC from the HEVC Reference is pretty damn weak compared to the reference VP9 encoder so their decission to look at the raw fixed Q performance is understandable especially seeing, that this is the area where they mostly contributed themselves to MPEG/AVC/HEVC
Though it's raw complexity which isn't the whole truth at all and H.266 will show that they know it very well themselves, we have arrived in diminishing returns space partly already no more energy to suck of the universe from
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :) It is about Time Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late ! http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004 Last edited by CruNcher; 10th December 2016 at 09:49. |
10th December 2016, 15:41 | #123 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 332
|
I just made a little test (latest git for all codec) with Kimono1_1920x1080_24.y4m @2500kbits :
x264 veryslow 3.00 Mo : ssim All:0.938488 (12.110405) psnr average:38.967018 x265 slower 2.87 Mo : ssim All:0.945886 (12.666905) psnr average:40.059902 vp9 cpu-used=2 2.82 Mo :ssim All:0.946726 (12.734856) psnr average:39.988449 and av1 cpu-used=2 2.77 Mo : ssim All:0.947562 (12.803542) psnr average:40.220836 So AV1 is better than VP9 and x265 for this clip ( and slower ). And I don't build aomenc with experimental flag that should give even better ( and even slower) result . |
11th December 2016, 10:04 | #124 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 61
|
Quote:
|
|
11th December 2016, 10:51 | #125 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 332
|
Quote:
I have not tested better settings cpu-used=1 or --best because it's too slow under 1fps |
|
15th December 2016, 19:49 | #126 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 61
|
At constant quality (measured by VMAF and PSNR-HVS on 30 short clips), I've got some impressive 33% reduction in size compared to x264, whereas with x265, I only achieved 5-10% at best. I'm gonna test it again in 10Bit and see if there is more room for improvement.
edit: I have --enable-dering experimental flag enabled to test. With PVQ enabled, computing was too slow. Last edited by Clare; 15th December 2016 at 19:51. |
20th December 2016, 23:13 | #128 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,926
|
Are you kinda disappointed about the Graph result or does it mirror also your HVS MOS ?
Are you gonna to include the preview results in the main image compare database at the different bpp/size targets ?
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :) It is about Time Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late ! http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004 Last edited by CruNcher; 20th December 2016 at 23:18. |
21st December 2016, 09:44 | #130 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 61
|
Quote:
I'm not gonna touch the comparison tools. @Jamaika: Graphs with Daala are included in the website in my signature/ |
|
21st December 2016, 22:56 | #131 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 95
|
@Clare
Don't dering and clpf have similar functionalities? You should try dering alone if you have the time. It's supposed to be better, especially at low bitrates.
__________________
https://github.com/MoSal |
22nd December 2016, 09:28 | #132 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 697
|
@Clare @Mosal Give some commands {apps}. What are the most beneficial for vmaf?
usage: vmaf app fmt ref dis w h apps: adm, ansnr, motion, vif, all How do the best on ffmpeg? Code:
ffmpeg.exe -loglevel verbose -i "input_yuv.mp4" -an -f yuv4mpegpipe -vf scale=1920:1080,format=yuv420p - | vmaf_main.exe ??? yuv420p - output.yuv 1920 1080 --output json aomenc.exe --codec=av1 --good --threads=4 --cpu-used=4 --target-bitrate=6000 --kf-max-dist=60 --auto-alt-ref=1 --frame-boost=1 --aq-mode=0 --color-space=bt709 --verbose --pass=1 --passes=1 --output=output.webm output.yuv |
22nd December 2016, 10:45 | #134 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 61
|
Quote:
Just build it like that: Code:
git clone https://github.com/Netflix/vmaf cd vmaf make Usage: ./wrapper/vmafossexec <pix_fmt> <width> <height> <ref_path> <dis_path> <model_path> The model path to use is "resource/model/nflxall_vmafv4.pkl" |
|
22nd December 2016, 11:50 | #135 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 95
|
I don't know about that.
I would still use one of the two if the results i'm getting are too smooth.
__________________
https://github.com/MoSal |
9th January 2017, 14:18 | #137 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 61
|
Quote:
Quote:
Although I'm personally skeptical about these delays. |
||
9th January 2017, 14:40 | #138 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 930
|
Quote:
So only someone within could give any information. I don't think there's anyone on this forum besides jmvalin who has any sort of attachment to AV1. |
|
10th January 2017, 21:34 | #139 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 34
|
Quote:
Last edited by Mr.Radar; 10th January 2017 at 21:37. |
|
15th January 2017, 11:06 | #140 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Berlin
Posts: 173
|
Quote:
for easier testing with logs and statistics i want to use a GUI. Is there already a GUI for aomenc.exe? |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|