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 AVC / H.264

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 2nd April 2008, 11:04   #201  |  Link
MythCreator
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Beijing,China
Posts: 77
x264.808.modified.experimental.exe

General thread:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=130364

x264.gaussian.cplxblur.01.diff
Dark Shikari: - gaussian cplxblur: gives a tiny improvement in 2pass ratecontrol
x264_me-prepass_DeathTheSheep.01.diff
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1093523
x264_2pass_vbv.7.diff
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.v...093/focus=3748
x264_hrd_pulldown.04_interlace.diff
- HRD and pulldown for HD compatibility, updated patch for interlacing
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...19#post1047919
x264_fix_win_stdin.diff
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...65#post1120065

Link to x264 patches collected: http://files.x264.nl/x264_patches/



make frofiled in GCC 4.4.0 20080331 experimental,totally for experiment & test
MythCreator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2008, 10:20   #202  |  Link
audyovydeo
Registered User
 
audyovydeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 464
bob0r,

I noticed the Thread Pool patch hasn't been applied in a while.
I haven't seen at which point it has been dumped : is it no longer useful, or it simply hasn't been updated ?


Also, am I alone in regretting SVN versioning ? Git seems pretty f_d up.


cheers
a/v
audyovydeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2008, 10:44   #203  |  Link
SpAwN_gUy
Junglist
 
SpAwN_gUy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Belarus, Minsk
Posts: 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by audyovydeo View Post
Also, am I alone in regretting SVN versioning ? Git seems pretty f_d up.
i was also thinking about WHY? ... SVN is just "New" (comparing to CVS) and git.. is just "newer"...
so.. why?
__________________
Rule Number 6: Concentrate!!!
(c)Hercules, Disney

"I like to build planes.... in the air" (c) some ADV.

tutorials
How to Setup agent-based encoding with x264farm (the easy way)
SpAwN_gUy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2008, 10:53   #204  |  Link
nm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 2,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpAwN_gUy View Post
i was also thinking about WHY? ... SVN is just "New" (comparing to CVS) and git.. is just "newer"...
so.. why?
Git is in many ways better than SVN and it makes things easier for collaborative development.
nm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2008, 12:40   #205  |  Link
Henrikx
Registered User
 
Henrikx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 306
What Patches would be useful in a Linux Build (Ubuntu).
Henrikx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2008, 13:08   #206  |  Link
J_Darnley
Registered User
 
J_Darnley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 959
What do you want your build to do differently than the git source? The patches (not the Win stdin patch) should work the same way on all systems.
__________________
x264 log explained || x264 deblocking how-to
preset -> tune -> user set options -> fast first pass -> profile -> level
Doom10 - Of course it's better, it's one more.
J_Darnley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2008, 14:25   #207  |  Link
Henrikx
Registered User
 
Henrikx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 306
@J_Darnley

Quote:
The patches (not the Win stdin patch) should work the same way on all systems.
That is precisely what I wanted to know.

THX!
Henrikx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2008, 21:43   #208  |  Link
DeathTheSheep
<The VFW Sheep of Death>
 
DeathTheSheep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Deathly pasture of VFW
Posts: 1,149
Git might be newer, and from a developer's standpoint it might be "supposedly" advantageous, but for pete's sake, the web interface is AWFUL. It can't even list the revision number on its (butt-ugly) log.

Ironic an encoder that makes video quite pretty has such an ugly developer's interface. Simplicity, I know...
__________________
Recommended all-in-one stop for x264/GCC needs on Windows: Komisar x264 builds!
DeathTheSheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2008, 21:48   #209  |  Link
Sharktooth
Mr. Sandman
 
Sharktooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Haddonfield, IL
Posts: 11,768
that's coz there's no revision number in git...
Sharktooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2008, 21:50   #210  |  Link
DeathTheSheep
<The VFW Sheep of Death>
 
DeathTheSheep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Deathly pasture of VFW
Posts: 1,149
Exactly my point.

Maybe you should "make the move" and switch your builds to a "last modified date," rather than revision number?

...on second thought, I've grown fond of the revision number system. :P

[edit]
More on topic, I'm thinking of optimizing prepass a bit more, at least so that it shares x264's new mv clipping method. Additionally, I'm also thinking of re-releasing AQ0.46 to overwrite the current 1.0 AQ (possibly deciding which rounding method to use based on whether or not an "--anime" tag is specified).

What sayeth thee?
__________________
Recommended all-in-one stop for x264/GCC needs on Windows: Komisar x264 builds!

Last edited by DeathTheSheep; 3rd April 2008 at 21:56.
DeathTheSheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2008, 09:44   #211  |  Link
SpAwN_gUy
Junglist
 
SpAwN_gUy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Belarus, Minsk
Posts: 298
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathTheSheep View Post
Additionally, I'm also thinking of re-releasing AQ0.46 to overwrite the current 1.0 AQ (possibly deciding which rounding method to use based on whether or not an "--anime" tag is specified).

What sayeth thee?
Cool. .. nice and simple... just --anime... and you're an Anime Encoder ..

maybe, it would be nice to make such optimisations not only for AQ? (like lame with its presets..)
__________________
Rule Number 6: Concentrate!!!
(c)Hercules, Disney

"I like to build planes.... in the air" (c) some ADV.

tutorials
How to Setup agent-based encoding with x264farm (the easy way)
SpAwN_gUy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2008, 16:46   #212  |  Link
Razorholt
Cyberspace Citizen
 
Razorholt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 457
How about grown-ups who don't like whatching cartoons? Kiiiiiding

What's your intention DeathTheSheep in re-releasing 0.46? Using it for anime only? Don't you think VAQ2 is better?

Last edited by Razorholt; 4th April 2008 at 19:53.
Razorholt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2008, 17:57   #213  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razorholt View Post
How about grown-ups who don't like whatching cartoons? Kiiiiiding

What's your intention DeathTheSheep in re-releasing 0.46? Using it for anime only? Don't you think VAQ2 is better?
His purpose is to discourage me from ever releasing any patches publicly again by intentionally distributing broken code with my name on it.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2008, 18:38   #214  |  Link
~bT~
н∂-αиαтι
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
Posts: 1,005
^ that's sad

keep up the gr8 work Dark!
~bT~ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2008, 20:07   #215  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,175
Its probably the combination of settings he's using is falsely giving the impression that 0.46 is better, when for example if crf mode the objective quality and file size better relates to simply lowering the crf value. A much better way would be to lower the crf instead. It could also be a settings issue where non-ideal settings are used? Of course with solid colour in anime (the Japanese definition of which is all animation), it probably just simply means lowering the AQ strength slightly may benefit, say to 0.7, and disabling fast-pskip! by --no-fast-pskip which is purported to be better in those situations.

Actually Dark_shikari, how is the relationship between --no-fast-pskip and AQ, do they affect each other? I was just thinking that if a slight deterioration occurs on solid colour due to pskip, AQ may be compensating hence causing problems referred to by deaththesheep? I'm only guessing here...
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2008, 20:25   #216  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by burfadel View Post
Actually Dark_shikari, how is the relationship between --no-fast-pskip and AQ, do they affect each other? I was just thinking that if a slight deterioration occurs on solid colour due to pskip, AQ may be compensating hence causing problems referred to by deaththesheep? I'm only guessing here...
AQ will reduce the amount of blocks in which fast-pskip is activated, yes. The primary effect is a reduction in speed.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2008, 21:13   #217  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,175
Therefore for anime, 0.46 was possibly not correcting the pskip induced areas that occur in flat areas, at least to the extent of the proper VAQ? leaving more bits for lines?

If thats the case, is variable fast-pskip possible? that is, only apply fast-pskip to non-flat areas? I'm guessing that would improve the picture quality and effectiveness of VAQ, and since it would only be applied to flat areas (or largely flat areas) not induce the speed penalty that occurs when --no-fast-pskip is applied? That would be a good default option if possible! I believe its only flat areas that are visually penalised by using fast-pskip?

Last edited by burfadel; 4th April 2008 at 21:16.
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2008, 00:43   #218  |  Link
DeathTheSheep
<The VFW Sheep of Death>
 
DeathTheSheep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Deathly pasture of VFW
Posts: 1,149
Mmkay guys, lots of stuff to address:
Quote:
What's your intention DeathTheSheep in re-releasing 0.46? Using it for anime only? Don't you think VAQ2 is better?
My intentions at the time of initial posting were nil, which is precisely the reason why I was gathering input. I've made extensive quality comparisons of the two and have found 0.46 produces a significantly higher SSIM and (perceived) visual quality on low-bitrate (high quantizer) anime sources, especially in baseline profile, and regardless of other options used. However, I do plan to wait it out a bit in the hopes that DS will in fact address anime specifically in VAQ2.0 (read below).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari
His purpose is to discourage me from ever releasing any patches publicly again by intentionally distributing broken code with my name on it.
What! I appreciate your work as much as (or perhaps more than) most. Recall I was of the very first to support your first x264 hacks (remember x264-sad-opt and such?), and was always in favor of you releasing all and anything you could. I can't understand your accusation of me intentionally discouraging you...unless the underlying intention of this statement is the OS equivalent of FUD (I'm teasing here, but really now, it's unprofessional). Look at my sources, people--any anime sources, including Gundam Seed--and test yourself. My tests were all very clear, replete with commandlines, the source, tons of screenshots, visual analysis, the sample clips, metrics (especially the one found in the "megathread"). Besides, the code is certainly not "broken" (though the rounding is mathematically suboptimal), and if you'd like I can take your name off of it, DS. You can disown your ugly first born, if you will. But at your strongly suggested request, I will hold off on releasing it and instead watch the progress of VAQ 2.0.

Quote:
Its probably the combination of settings he's using is falsely giving the impression that 0.46 is better
Wrong, my good sir. While I do not profess nearly the code affinity and proficiency of DS, I understand the quality settings of x264 at least well enough to conduct proper and thorough testing (note: baseline/mobile profile). However, in doubt, I also used an exhaustive testing rubric, trying a ridiculously large combination of settings in the effort to convince myself. As you recall, I used no-fast-pskip in the majority of my testing--but certainly not all--and please remember the fact that the underlying algorithm is essentially a quantizer redistribution according to a variance function, not an intentional modification of color information. The difference between 1.0 and 0.46, for instance, is the rounding for core formula. That is all.

If you want a technical explanation, refer to the previous thread. 1.0 is no longer a patch. The admittedly interesting postulate that 0.46 is "favoring lines" isn't necessarily the case either. The quantizers were properly raised, but to the extent that the x264 deblocker would (conveniently) efficiently conceal artifacts. Additionally, relatively flat backgrounds and such were indeed awarded lower quantizers, but not to the extent that blocks would reappear due to an excess or an irregularity of distribution across the entire background. However, it isn't a matter of simply decreasing AQ strength on 1.0 to re-acheive this fragile balance--rather, the two algorithms have a markedly distinct visual effect from one another, for better (as DS strongly supports), or for worse (as DS strongly opposes, since his interests understandably lie with his newer codebase, the evolution of his brainchild).

And indeed, this is only noticeable on anime. Perhaps 0.48/1.0 is in the lead as regards live footage/non-anime content. One would be more willing to accept that a perfected mathematical formula to account for real quantization error would perform more optimally on non-artificial footage unlike anime.

But when all is said and done, this isn't a settings discussion, or a question of whether or not anybody/anything knows what he/it's doing, or who/what is right and wrong about the subtleties of the algorithms at hand--I had wanted a re-release so that any user can come along and see it for himself with his sources and bitrates which performed more optimally for his needs.

The point of fact is, there is far too much contention, and I fear re-releasing AQ 0.46 at this point will do much in the way of hurting DS (his feelings, his name, his efforts) and perhaps the concept of "progress" itself, so I will not. At least not until 2.0 has matured enough to make differences meaningful, not to mention worthwhile. I have my eyes on it, in the meantime...
DeathTheSheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2008, 00:48   #219  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathTheSheep View Post
Look at my sources, people--any anime sources, including Gundam Seed--and test yourself. My tests were all very clear, replete with commandlines, the source, tons of screenshots, visual analysis, the sample clips, metrics (especially the one found in the "megathread").
Your tests were completely invalid, and only proved one thing: lower AQ strength was better on certain frames in anime. Because 0.46 had an effectively lower strength, it therefore performed better on those frames. You have never ever posted any comparison clip in which AQ 0.46 offered a "better" distribution of QPs except in that it offered a weaker AQ.

Yet you cannot accept this simple fact, and continue to simply post cherrypicked comparison frames and intentionally misleading comparisons in order to promote an algorithm that does not make sense.

I welcome an attempt to make a better AQ for anime; I have had a number of ideas in mind, in fact, such as intentionally raising QP for flat blocks while putting lambda much lower, to take advantage of the higher deblocking.

I don't welcome an attempt to rip off a broken, bugged version of my own work and, through a careful campaign of misleading comparisons, declare it "better."
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2008, 00:51   #220  |  Link
DeathTheSheep
<The VFW Sheep of Death>
 
DeathTheSheep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Deathly pasture of VFW
Posts: 1,149
Nobody sweepingly declared anything better, and people can determine for themselves whether or not my tests were valid. I strongly believe in their suggestive validity. The higher 0.46 AQ strength was optimal metrically and visually when keyframes (or the frames you "cherrypicked" [that's a funny word] immediately proceeding them!) were respectively boosted. Again, the frames I chose were random. Again, I did not base my comparisons off of still shots.

I welcome your ideas to make AQ better for anime. So much so I'm not re-releasing 0.46, as I said. Please don't misinterpret, and please don't go on the defensive/offensive about this. How about you email me, and I'll take this whole shebang off air, eh?
__________________
Recommended all-in-one stop for x264/GCC needs on Windows: Komisar x264 builds!

Last edited by DeathTheSheep; 5th April 2008 at 01:01.
DeathTheSheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
h.264, x264, x264 builds, x264 patches, x264 unofficial builds

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 05:00.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.