Large AVC Project... Thoughts Welcome!

[Dayvon]

Lord Of The Rings Extended Project

Phase 1: COMPLETE

Goal = A high quality MP4 version of the Lord Of The Rings Extended DVD's all stored on one DVD/DL (8150MB limit).

Stats:
Fellowship_w/o credits = 3h20min Total (Est: 2403MB)
Two Towers_w/o credits = 3h35m Total (Est: 2583MB)
Return_w/ credits = 4h23m Total (Est: 3158MB)
GRAND TOTAL = 11h18m (Est: 8146MB)

Example Script:
LoadPlugin("D:\PROGRA~1\GORDIA~1\DGMPGDec\DGDecode.dll")
mpeg2source("H:\DVD TEMP\LOTR_EE_Fellowship_D2\VIDEO_TS\Fellowship_D2.d2v")
crop(0,58,720,358)
LanczosResize(880,368)

Recommended Settings:
#1
x264 1350kbps AVC High Profile
x264.exe --pass 2 --bitrate 1350 --stats ".stats" --ref 3 --bframes 2 --b-pyramid --b-rdo --bime --weightb --filter -2,-2 --subme 6 --trellis 1 --analyse all --8x8dct --threads 2 --progress --no-psnr --output
NAAC 320kbps CBR LC-AAC 5.1
BeSweet.exe -core( -input "" -output "" -logfilea "" ) -azid( -c normal ) -bsn( -6chnew -cbr 320 -codecquality_high -aacprofile_lc -exportaac ) -ota( -d 0 -g max )

#2
x264 1320kbps AVC High Profile
x264.exe --pass 2 --bitrate 1320 --stats ".stats" --ref 3 --bframes 2 --b-pyramid --b-rdo --bime --weightb --filter -2,-2 --subme 6 --trellis 1 --analyse all --8x8dct --threads 2 --progress --no-psnr --output
NAAC LC-AAC VBR 5.1 Internet Q
BeSweet.exe -core( -input "" -output "" -logfilea "" ) -azid( -c normal ) -bsn( -6chnew -vbr_internet -codecquality_high -aacprofile_lc -exportaac ) -ota( -d 0 -g max )

#3
x264 1450kbps AVC High Profile
x264.exe --pass 2 --bitrate 1450 --stats ".stats" --ref 3 --bframes 2 --b-pyramid --b-rdo --bime --weightb --filter -2,-2 --subme 6 --trellis 1 --analyse all --8x8dct --threads 2 --progress --no-psnr --output
NAAC 224kbps CBR LC-AAC Stereo DLP2
BeSweet.exe -core( -input "" -output "" -logfilea "" ) -azid( -s dplii -c normal -L -3db ) -bsn( -6chnew -cbr 224 -codecquality_high -aacprofile_lc -exportaac ) -ota( -d 0 -g max )

Mux using YAMB 1.4 w/ Mp4Box

Results of #3:
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/3231/webbalrog3xj.th.png (http://img90.imageshack.us/my.php?image=webbalrog3xj.png)http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/7820/webwater9mo.th.png (http://img100.imageshack.us/my.php?image=webwater9mo.png)http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/7214/webwaterfall2tn.th.png (http://img100.imageshack.us/my.php?image=webwaterfall2tn.png)
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/9226/webrainorc8lg.th.png (http://img208.imageshack.us/my.php?image=webrainorc8lg.png)http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/3794/webrain0qg.th.png (http://img208.imageshack.us/my.php?image=webrain0qg.png)http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/937/weborc2vu.th.png (http://img81.imageshack.us/my.php?image=weborc2vu.png)
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/5051/webstable6ir.th.png (http://img99.imageshack.us/my.php?image=webstable6ir.png)http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/5566/webgaladriel8fh.th.png (http://img207.imageshack.us/my.php?image=webgaladriel8fh.png)http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7196/webtheoden5yq.th.png (http://img99.imageshack.us/my.php?image=webtheoden5yq.png)

More Pictures: Two Towers Small Sampling__5MB.zip (http://church.crossingatwoodland.com/Temp/download/Two Towers_5MB.zip) - Two Towers Large Sampling__15MB.zip (http://church.crossingatwoodland.com/Temp/download/Two Towers_15MB.zip)

Path Summary:
Original Purchased DVD -> DVDShrink 3.2 (no compression, movie only) -> Hard Disk -> DGIndex
Video Path -> MeGUI AVSynth Script Creator -> Encode -> Output x264 raw
Audio Path -> BeLight -> Encode -> Output AAC raw
Mux Path -> YAMB 1.4 Mux A&V -> YAMB 1.4 Join MP4 (Disc's 1 and 2 together, or entire set)



PHASE 2: PrePlanning

Goal = Each movie, higher than DVD quality as an MP4 file each on a DVD-R Disc. Maximum HD-Quality.

1360x560 Resolution
LimitedSharpen
FluxsmoothST
Lanczosresize
AVC - 2000kbps_x264
LC-AAC - 320+kbps_NAAC
YAMB - Mp4

More Info Coming Soon......





__________________________________ORIGINAL_PROJECT_POST_BELOW__________________________________
I've been considering doing something for quite sometime, and now, I'm really thinking of doing it. Lord of the Rings Extended. I've wanted to make an Mpeg4 - high quality version of these to fit on my computer/DVD backup for a while. Since I have now come to be fairly proficient with MeGUI, x264, Belight + AAC, and Mp4Box, I've come to the conclusion that now is the time. So here is my step-by-step plan.
1. Quality requirements.
- Good quality video for HDTV. x264 has allowed me to find bitrates down to about 1000kbps to be acceptable. 1500 kbps is the goal. I find this necessary especially when viewing from an HDTV.
- 5.1 surround sound. Got to keep the surround audio for the immersive experience. This means AAC, DTS or AC3.
- MP4 container-compliant. MP4 for future mindedness. Compliant for the same reason. This means that AVC and AAC are the way to go.
- No chapters or subtitles necessary. This is the way I roll. I just dont need 'em.

2. General Overview
- The overall length of the film(s) will be approx 11hrs19min. Using MeGUI's Bitrate calculator I found that at CBR 320kbps audio, an x264 MP4 would achieve about a 1350kbps rate to fit the files on an 8150MB DVDDL. This means that potentially, I can hit close to my desired quality and fit it all (678 min) onto 1 DVD-DL.
- The only question that remains is, should I join all the movies into one big 11hr MP4 file? This is something I haven't figured out yet, and would love advice on. I know that YAMB would potentially allow it, but I don't know if that's the wisest move. My plan right now, is to have 3 mp4 files, one for each movie.

3. Video
- My program path: DVDShrink -> DGIndex -> MeGUI -> .264 file
- I'm planning on cropping and lancos resizing via AVSynth. Files will be resized to 880x360 to keep as much of the vertical information as possible.
- I'm using 2-pass encoding obviously, but I'm not sure what other x264 settings I should use. I don't want to have these encodes running forever, yet I want the quality to be high, cause I dont want to wish later that I had encoded better.
- I'm not planning on keeping all the credits for space's sake. I am however keeping the Return of the King's credits, being that they have the hand-drawn pictures and such. Each intro will be played accordingly however.

4. Audio
- My program path: DVDShrink -> DGIndex -> BeLight -> aac file
- I'm planning on using nero aac encoder.
- There have been audio sync problems with most people's combining of Disc 1 and 2 for each set, but since I've been cutting the end and beginnings of each very tightly, I expect to have a fairly easy time with video sync.

5. Muxing
- My program path: .264 file + aac file -> YAMB -> Join MP4's in YAMB
- I will have six different encodes on this project, and these will be muxed into three MP4 files. This will require muxing and joining in YAMB.

6. DVD Burning
- Nero Data Setting

I expect this project to have complete success. As I run into problems or other hang-ups, I'll be posting them here. If you have questions, suggestions, or comments please post 'em, I'll read 'em.

DISCLAIMER: I don't know if anyone cares what I'm doing, but I thought I'd share as this seems like a really cool project to me. Anyways, have a good one!

[Sirber]

Are you making a GUI?

[Dayvon]

Are you making a GUI?

No. I think this project is self explanatory. There isn't a thread to generally discuss encoding projects, so I put it here.

MOD's: Feel free to move this to the appropriate sub-forum.

[Doom9]

Files will be resized to 880x360 Umm.. I thought you'd be using a DVD as source and DVDs are limited to 720 pixels horizontal so it makes no sense to go any higher than that.

[Dayvon]

Umm.. I thought you'd be using a DVD as source and DVDs are limited to 720 pixels horizontal so it makes no sense to go any higher than that.

Right you are. But the vertical resolution of the video is about 360 pixels, while the horizontal pixels are stretched. This means if I stick to the 2.44:1 ratio, then I would have 720x294 resolution which means I would be losing about 65 pixels of vertical info because of downsizing. Correct me if I'm wrong here but wouldn't my setting potentially have higher PQ?

[foxyshadis]

Well, you could just use anamorphic encoding. You only have 720 source horizontal pixels, so creating extra information is going to drag down quality somewhat. When you're hitting that kind of bitrate with AVC you're probably within the anamorphic confort range. (Of course anamorphic playback isn't always perfect... but there's a current thread on solving that in this forum.)

[berrinam]

- I'm planning on cropping and lancos resizing via AVSynth. Files will be resized to 880x360 to keep as much of the vertical information as possible.What you should really do then is encode it anamorphically. This means that you could encode it at the same resolution as the DVD was at, keeping all the resolution without wastefully upsizing horizontally. Read through this thread to get an idea of how to do it: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=105809

Here is my current commandline.
_______________________________________________________________
D:\Program Files\x264\x264.exe --pass 2 --bitrate 1440 --stats ".stats" --ref 3 --bframes 2 --b-pyramid --b-rdo --bime --weightb --filter -3,-3 --subme 6 --trellis 1 --analyse p8x8,b8x8,i4x4,p4x4 --threads 2 --progress --no-psnr --output "" ""
_______________________________________________________________

I have a few gripes with that:
-You aren't using High Profile (8x8dct, specifically). You could get a considerable improvement by going up to High Profile. I really recommend it.
-Your value for the deblocking filter (-3,-3) is very low. You may want to consider raising it.
I would really recommend using one of Sharktooth's HQ profiles (HQ-Slow is probably the best for you, as it is the fastest of them, you have a very long encode, and the quality is still very good).

Also, from the location of x264.exe in Program Files, it looks like you are using MeGUI x264 (limited) edition. You should try looking at the full version, because it adds integration of besweet/nero audio encoding (just the same as you are doing with BeLight), DGIndexing, mp4 muxing with mp4box (but not joining. Is it really worth joining the 3 files, though?). If you need help on using MeGUI, have a look at my guide: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=773259#post773259

[*.mp4 guy]

At that bitrate there shouldn't be any noticible blocking, I've gotten good looking 1 cd rips using -3:0. Deblocking is more personal preference then anything else.

[Dayvon]

What you should really do then is encode it anamorphically. This means that you could encode it at the same resolution as the DVD was at, keeping all the resolution without wastefully upsizing horizontally. Read through this thread to get an idea of how to do it: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=105809


I have a few gripes with that:
-You aren't using High Profile (8x8dct, specifically). You could get a considerable improvement by going up to High Profile. I really recommend it.
-Your value for the deblocking filter (-3,-3) is very low. You may want to consider raising it.
I would really recommend using one of Sharktooth's HQ profiles (HQ-Slow is probably the best for you, as it is the fastest of them, you have a very long encode, and the quality is still very good).

Also, from the location of x264.exe in Program Files, it looks like you are using MeGUI x264 (limited) edition. You should try looking at the full version, because it adds integration of besweet/nero audio encoding (just the same as you are doing with BeLight), DGIndexing, mp4 muxing with mp4box (but not joining. Is it really worth joining the 3 files, though?). If you need help on using MeGUI, have a look at my guide: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=773259#post773259

Thanks sooooo much. I totally did not notice that I hadn't enable high profile. I had selected ALL in the tab for those 8x8, 4x4 thing, but I had to enable it in the screen before. Generally, I like less deblocking. I find it smears too much for my tastes.

Oh, and I am using MeGUI, NOT the x264 version. I like to put my codecs where I can find them and use them from there. :)

[kotrtim]

Oh, and I am using MeGUI, NOT the x264 version. I like to put my codecs where I can find them and use them from there.

You can copy the profile folder from shartooth's megui-x264 folder:profile and also folder:data , you can normally get it here "C:\Program Files\x264\" and those 2 folders mentioned to the same directoty as your MeGUI, you'll have all the presets made by shartooth....pretty easy , don't have check the options, just simply go for HQ profiles if high quality what you are looking for.

-s dplii, remove this line!!

use this
-azid( -c normal )

my suggestion is
audio: Nero LC-AAC streaming ~ 400 kbps... 256 kbps is too low
make sure it is nero 6, if you are using nero 7, the command line you used for besweet will produce wrong channel mapping

video: ~1300 kbps, keep the original resolution, apply no resize filter, use picture aspect ratio features of mp4...I'm sure you'll get the encode done at quantizer lower than the default 26 at such high bitrate.

[bkman]

Why not HE-AAC?

[Dayvon]

@bkman
As far as I've found HE-AAC sounds not so good (to my ear). If I was converting from a 5.1 WAV source, then it'd probably be ok, but from compressed AC3 it doesn't cut the quality for me.

@kotrtim
256 is a bit low I agree. However, going to 320kbps means lower than 1400kbps on video.... So the sacrifice has to be made somewhere. I tried out the 256 CBR 5.1, and the rear channels are somewhat artifacing when you listen to them alone, however, when you listen to the whole mix it sounds fine. Not great, but fine. Good enough to not notice when engrossed in the movie.

I really wish that there was either 2-pass AAC encoding or an ABR setting. The streaming-internet-radio-settings I can't find bitrate information on but I assume they are a VBR constant quality-type setting and don't hit a certain filesize. If I could use a VBR setting and hit approx 256 CBR file size, I want that.

@Everyone
Thanks so much for the info on Sharktooth's presets. I do have them, but I like to get down and dirty with the codecs. I got a good idea what I'm doin' so well see in about 1hr when the first Fellowship disc is done.

Cheers!

EDIT: So the encode finished and the first muxing just got done. I think it looks great aside from some blocking issues in certain cloud type things. The audio and video quality are really great though. This is a great project and quite the example for how awesome AVC, AAC, MeGUI, and the MP4 standard are compared to the DVD standard. I'm gonna keep rollin' with this, I'll let you all know how it goes.

[*.mp4 guy]

If the blocking occurs a lot you might want to try a cqm on a sample clip and see if you like it better (make sure to test your original settings on the same clip aswell to make sure that you get accurate results)

[iceborne]

why don't you transcode the dts file to acc instead. the source is a lot cleaner than ac3

[[)370|\|470!2]

I'd suggest using DPLII instead of 5.1. It restores 5.1 sounds almost perfectly,
especially when using an external Dolby amplifier. And @ 256kbps it'll sound nice
both as 2.0 and surround-restored.

[Dayvon]

Update....

Well Fellowship Extended Edition is compressed, cut, muxed, and joined successfully!!! I had a bit of trouble with the sync when joining the first 2 discs. I started Fellowship Disc 2 on the first frame which introduce a 240ms sync issue. I anticipate less issue with the other discs since I didn't start any of the other discs on the first frame.

Other notes of interest include, a 2453MB final size with a length of 3hr20m35s (credits cut) and that's with 1450kbps and 256kbps bitrates.

I may consider redoing the audio after the initial run depending on how much extra space I end up with. Or maybe I'll redo using MP3 and DPL2.

why don't you transcode the dts file to acc instead. the source is a lot cleaner than ac3
I've never really heard of using the DTS as your source. I suppose I could... How much better would it be than using the AC3?

Anyway, thanks for all your input. I'll let you all know how it goes.

[kotrtim]

DTS = 768 kbps
AC3 = 448 kbps

the bitrate difference is quite large, DTS is of course better

Besweet supports DTS, but you'll need to have a WinDVD (pay ware) installed. Decode can only be done in 1X....very slow......

Otherwise, try foobar's DTS playback plugin (libdts) & nero encoder plugin, free! the faster your processor, the faster it decodes

I may consider redoing the audio after the initial run depending on how much extra space I end up with. Or maybe I'll redo using MP3 and DPL2.
He-AAC, are you using Nero 6 He-AAC?, yeah it is truly bad, outdated....but Nero 7 He-AAC is so much better, it doesn't have those horrible artefacts that Nero 6 has

Or you can also use Winamp's He-AAC, it's one of the best He-AAC

[[)370|\|470!2]

He-AAC, are you using Nero 6 He-AAC?, yeah it is truly bad, outdated....but Nero 7 He-AAC is so much better, it doesn't have those horrible artefacts that Nero 6 has

Oh really? I'd say it's sux the exactly same way as before. Dimkovic should retire. Pity. :devil:

Or you can also use Winamp's He-AAC, it's one of the best He-AAC

Yea. He may also consider to encode his video @ 200kbps. xD

[Dayvon]

LOL. Well guys, I'm actually using LC-AAC as I can't stand the sound of HE-AAC. At the 256 CBR, it doesn't sound half bad. I can hear it if I'm listening for it, but I think it is that way with almost any codec from AC3.

I'm trying the different VBR settings (radio-internet-streaming) to see if I can hit my file size and get a better sound than the 256 CBR. Hopefully, my encodes might be a bit smaller than they were estimated at. The calc said to use 1459kbps AVC but I like round numbers and also like to give some space so I ran them at 1450kbps. Hopefully, I might have enough room to squeak out 320kbps LC-AAC 5.1 sound. That would make it all better. :)

[Oline 61]

Dayvon, my I inquire as to how you are going about IVTC on "The Fellowship of the Ring"? For me Telecide or TIVTC produced strange red artifacts, and Force Film in DGIndex left behind a few interlaced frames. How are you doing it?

[foxyshadis]

HE-AAC is designed entirely for < 64kbps (or < 128kbps 5.1), getting relatively better the lower you go, so it makes sense that it sounds terrible at those bitrates. =p

[kotrtim]

Oh really? I'd say it's sux the exactly same way as before. Dimkovic should retire. Pity.

You can listen it yourself, it really does improve a lot...

[Soulhunter]

Umm.. I thought you'd be using a DVD as source and DVDs are limited to 720 pixels horizontal so it makes no sense to go any higher than that.

Pardon!? (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=568512#post568512) ^^


Bye

[[)370|\|470!2]

You can listen it yourself, it really does improve a lot...

Of course i did. Tested with aacenc32.dll ver.4.2.2.3, compared to ver.4.2.0.27
(nero7 vs nero6). Both samples @ 64kbps sounds disgusting. Even LC imho sounds better
at this bitrate. And oggenc aotuv beats them all. But enough offtopic. :sly:

[Dayvon]

I don't mind the off topic. Audio quality to me is just about as important as the visual quality.

I watched thru The Fellowship, and I really didn't mind the LC-AAC @ 256kbps. Not that I couldn't hear the artifacts, but that it didn't bother me much. When I focused on listening for it, I could here it with certain voice textures, in quite a few musical string passages and lack of high-pitch detail in the rear speakers.

Just for testing purpose sake, I'm doing my first cut of Return of the King using MP3 256kbps w/ DLP2. Obviously this will help with the string passages and the vocal textures. I'm hoping that I don't lose to much directional information.

Is there an audio filter I can use to decode DLP2? I need it to decode in the player since my external won't exactly decode DLP2.

_________________________________________________________________
Oh, and BTW, I've now finished the Two Towers encode. Length = 03h34m49s. Size = 2627MB.

Lord Of The Rings total length so far = 06h55m24s Size = 5080MB

Total GOAL Size = 8373MB

Return of the King max size = 3293MB__ Estimated length = 04h23m03s

Should be right on track!!
_________________________________________________________________

Thanks everyone!

[[)370|\|470!2]

FFDShow has Dolby decoder, just enable it and configure I/O.

[Dayvon]

I thought it did. Thanks ;)

[nm]

Yes, FFDShow has a Dolby Pro Logic decoder, but it doesn't decode Pro Logic II properly (discussion about DPL2 decoding here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=771207#post771207)). So you'll get the same results with it as with an external DPL1 decoder.

[Dayvon]

Dayvon, my I inquire as to how you are going about IVTC on "The Fellowship of the Ring"? For me Telecide or TIVTC produced strange red artifacts, and Force Film in DGIndex left behind a few interlaced frames. How are you doing it?

I haven't had any interlaced issues. I do have one spot in Two Towers Disc2 at the very beginning where there is about 10 frames that are interlaced, but that's it. I've had no problem with Fellowship (Disc1 or 2) watched the enitre 3h20m last night. All I did was force film in DGIndex.

Maybe you need to get latest version of DGIndex?. I have 1.4.3

In terms of DLP2....

I tried using the ffdshow Dolby digital decode, but the rear output sounds a bit funny to me. Almost like it has a tremolo on it (volume rising and lowering quickly and at a constant rate). I checked more forum stuff, and it seems that ffdshow does not do DLP2 decoding properly. Wondering if anyone can shed some more light on this issue?

[nm]

I tried using the ffdshow Dolby digital decode, but the rear output sounds a bit funny to me. Almost like it has a tremolo on it (volume rising and lowering quickly and at a constant rate). I checked more forum stuff, and it seems that ffdshow does not do DLP2 decoding properly. Wondering if anyone can shed some more light on this issue?
Did you check the discussion I linked to above?

[Dayvon]

Yeah. Specifically wonderbra says, "Keep in mind that DPLII decoding is done by hardware AC3 decoders, there is no codec or software that really provides true DPLII decoding, since the matrixes (as simple as they are) are not properly implemented yet by any software decoder."

I have an USB external sound card that does AC3 decoding and sends the surround info to my Logitech Z-560's via analog 1/8 inch plugs. My sound card doesn't decode the DLP2.

Should I be using ffdshow to decode DLP2, or AC3filter? Or should I get those speaker I've wanted? :D http://www.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=4117156/sort_type=bottomline

[nm]

Should I be using ffdshow to decode DLP2, or AC3filter? Or should I get those speaker I've wanted? :D http://www.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=4117156/sort_type=bottomline
Try both and use whatever pleases you most. For most purposes DPLII is inferior to DD 5.1 and in some cases to 5.1 LC AAC @256kbps, so I wouldn't buy new hardware just because of it.

[Dayvon]

I've been wanting to upgrade to those speaker for a while anyway. But, yeah, I'm thinking that I'll stick with the LC AAC. If only there was a way to get ABR LC-AAC 5.1 !!!!!!

Oh and if I want to do DLP2 in the future, should I pull my source from a DD 2.0 or DD 5.1 AC3?

[nm]

Oh and if I want to do DLP2 in the future, should I pull my source from a DD 2.0 or DD 5.1 AC3?
5.1 certainly, but the DD 2.0 track could already be in DPL2, in which case you can use it as is, or re-encode if it is too large or you have difficulties with putting an AC3 track into your container.

[Doom9]

Pardon!? ^^there are plenty on-the-fly resizers that you can use if you really care. It is basically possible to do all the filtering didee applies before encoding after encoding.. thus leaving it up to the very same algorithms to get the picture to the desired size.
The thread you linked to does not take into account the severe bits/pixel deficit you incurr when you upsize prior to encoding. And on top of that, to be fair you'd have to apply the whole filter chain except for resizing to a non resized encode as well.

[Soulhunter]

there are plenty on-the-fly resizers that you can use if you really care. It is basically possible to do all the filtering didee applies before encoding after encoding.. thus leaving it up to the very same algorithms to get the picture to the desired size... ...And on top of that, to be fair you'd have to apply the whole filter chain except for resizing to a non resized encode as well.
Veto! :) It can make a big difference if you apply a filter before or after upsizing (as Didèe tried to show with his example) and as such "advanced filtering" doesnt run in realtime (not even with the most recent cpu) you cant do it on-the-fly!

The thread you linked to does not take into account the severe bits/pixel deficit you incurr when you upsize prior to encoding.
Ditto! :) Yes, of course the upsized version is less compressible than the small one! So at a low-mid bitrates (<- yes, very vague... lets say 1-3CD ASP / 1-2CD AVC encodes) the upsized one will have more artefacts, but also more MVs and smaller blocks (yes, only a minor benefit). But at higher bitrates (where compression artefacts arent visible anyway) it will only lose some of the details you enhanced before. IMO: In the first case its probably a matter of taste (details -vs- artefacts... just like with h.263 -vs- MPEG or XviD -vs- DivX). But for the second case I can confirm that the "upsized->filtered" version will look better than "filtered->upsized" one! Tho a compare of both methods would make a interesting subject for a future blindtest... ^^


Bye

[nm]

Veto! :) It can make a big difference if you apply a filter before or after upsizing (as Didèe tried to show with his example) and as such "advanced filtering" doesnt run in realtime (not even with the most recent cpu) you cant do it on-the-fly!
Perhaps you can't run some insane "advanced" filtering, but for example lanczos resizing runs just fine on-the-fly, even on not-so-recent processors. Didèe's example showed the results of bad (hardware) bilinear filtering and compared that to a hand-crafted example of the desired result. Even plain lanczos resizing would have been much better, and that still leaves room for other filtering. Of course you can argue that people want to display the video with standalones or hardware-assisted decoders, but then, people do stupid things ;)

I'm very sceptical that you would get better results with any filtering and upsizing prior to encoding compared to normal high-quality realtime resizing of the encoded video. It would be nice to see blind-test results or even some samples for testing.

[guada 2]

Yes... "Soul "

Very interesting like comparison.

It would be well to make this test on a source of bad quality.
But I suppose that it is only useful on low bitrate.

Interesting, but the time of encoding is it the same in the 2 cases?

To check too.

[IgorC]

Of course i did. Tested with aacenc32.dll ver.4.2.2.3, compared to ver.4.2.0.27
(nero7 vs nero6). Both samples @ 64kbps sounds disgusting. Even LC imho sounds better
at this bitrate. And oggenc aotuv beats them all. But enough offtopic. :sly:

It was public blind test. http://www.rjamorim.com/test/64test/plot12z.png

http://www.rjamorim.com/test/64test/results.html
Since then HE and LC profiles were impoved both . The difference is here.

[Soulhunter]

I'm very sceptical that you would get better results with any filtering and upsizing prior to encoding compared to normal high-quality realtime resizing of the encoded video...

Then you probably never used filters like LimitedSharpen (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=84196) or IIP (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=70916)!?

Socio posted a interesting compare some time ago...

Source:
http://img147.exs.cx/img147/3656/nosharpen6xy.jpg

LimitedSharpen + IIP
http://img48.exs.cx/img48/1732/ls2iip7mr.jpg


Interesting, but the time of encoding is it the same in the 2 cases?


More resolution = More pixels to filter = More cpu cycles needed = Slower ;)


Bye

[guada 2]

@Soulhunter

Why LimitedSharpen + IIP? and not IIP + LimitedSharpen ?

Could you explain please?

[nm]

LimitedSharpen and IIP have little to do with actual resizing. You can as well use them on the source before encoding without resizing and get similar results, like Doom9 already said above.

[Soulhunter]

LimitedSharpen and IIP have little to do with actual resizing. You can as well use them on the source before encoding without resizing and get similar results, like Doom9 already said above.
Nope, and thats what Didèe tried to explain with his example...

Filtering -> Resizing cant achieve the same results as Resizing -> Sharpening!

@Soulhunter

Why LimitedSharpen + IIP? and not IIP + LimitedSharpen ?

Could you explain please?

Well, ask Socio! He posted the samples... ;)


Bye

[nm]

Filtering -> Resizing cant achieve the same results as Resizing -> Sharpening!
I agree, but you are now leaving the encoding part out of the equation. I also agree that if you resize before encoding and give it as much bitrate as it needs (with a fixed quantizer for example), you can get better results. What I don't agree with is that you could use the same bitrate (one that is enough for the not-resized source) for both encodes and the resized one would look better.

You can also sharpen after resizing on-the-fly with a decent processor. Again the algorithms may not be as high quality, but the result would still be better compared to watching the encoding artifacts.

[guada 2]

"Soul.."

After a small test:
Limitedsharpen+IIP: picture is more fluid, luminous and more matter than IIP+Limitedsharpen.

Strange but it's true.
maybe, Socio or Didée have an idea ?

:thanks: Soulhunter ;)

[Soulhunter]

I agree, but you are now leaving the encoding part out of the equation. I also agree that if you resize before encoding and give it as much bitrate as it needs (with a fixed quantizer for example), you can get better results. What I don't agree with is that you could use the same bitrate (one that is enough for the not-resized source) for both encodes and the resized one would look better. Yes, it works only if the bitrate is high enough! Visually "close to lossless" or like I wrote earlier: "higher bitrates (where compression artefacts arent visible anyway)" What someone considers as "is enough" varys from 1CD to 1DVD, so this kind of processing wont be ideal for everyone, yes...


You can also sharpen after resizing on-the-fly with a decent processor. Again the algorithms may not be as high quality, but the result would still be better compared to watching the encoding artifacts.Fair enough! One is happy with simple EE sharpening as post-processing the next one spends hours to remove EE halos from a source just to spend even more hours to re-sharpen it without halos. Different ppl, different quality needs! Still the statement that upsizing a source is always wrong and makes no sense at all is wrong...


Bye

[iceborne]

how do you get limitedsharpen and iip to work? i'm new at avs scripts. can you give me a sample avs script with those function involve? i wanto to test these sharpening effects out.

[Dayvon]

Well on the audio encoding side, I just got done doing a few test runs on the 1st Two Towers disc. Here are my results.
_______________________________________________________________
Length: 01h46m33s__Source: AC3 5.1 @ 448kbps = 341MB

LC-AAC w/ DLP2@ 224kbps = 148MB; Quality = Good (except for rear decoding which is probably my setup)
MP3 w/ DLP2 @ 224kbps = 173MB; Quality = Passable (except for rear decoding which is probably my setup)
LC-AAC 5.1 @Radio Q = 170MB; Quality = Poor
LC-AAC 5.1 @256kbps = 197MB; Quality = Passable
MP3 w/ DLP2 @256kbps = 198MB; Quality = Good (except for rear decoding which is probably my setup)
LC-AAC 5.1 @320kbps = 245MB; Quality = Good
LC-AAC 5.1 @Internet Q = 254MB; Quality = Good
LC-AAC 5.1 @Streaming Q = 315MB; Quality = Good (not much better)
_______________________________________________________________

I normally like the Normal Q or Streaming Q settings for LC-AAC 5.1, which both are close to the size of the original AC3. I'm hoping for undersized file totals which might let me squeak in LC-AAC 5.1 Internet Q audio tracks for the entire project. Crossing my fingers... ;)

So moral of the story is, try to not go below LC-AAC 5.1 @ 320, or Internet Q. These qualitys are about the minimum bitrates if you are sensitive to compression artifacts and the "sizzling bacon" syndrome.

[Soulhunter]

how do you get limitedsharpen and iip to work? i'm new at avs scripts. can you give me a sample avs script with those function involve? i wanto to test these sharpening effects out.
I gonna send you a pm...


Bye

[IgorC]

I think it is not offtopic. But part of this project.

Did anybody try QuickTime7 LC-AAC 5.1 VBR? Actually Apple LC-AAC Stereo brings superior quality than Nero7.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=38792

http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.11/results_gr5.png

For my ears Apple 5.1 approx. 200 kbps brings transparent quality. (the same bitrate is used for HD trailers 720/1080p)
For some tracks where is mostly human speech 160-192 kbps HE-AAC Nero7 5.1 is more than enough.