BD-Rebuilder, Feature Requests

[HWK]

@ JDobbs,

Do we really need this line anymore? With elimination of ffdshow and haali as a option consider revising statement.

Download and install FFDSHOW and the Haali Matroska Splitter. They are required for BD-RB to work and are free. After the install, run "Video Decoder Configuration" for FFDSHOW from the "START/Programs" menu, and make sure MPEG2 decoding is enabled. Do the same using "Audio Decoder Configuration" to ensure "Uncompressed" is set to "All Supported".

[Ch3vr0n]

yes u do, as ffvideosource is currently in the test stage. jdobbs posted a few posts back he likes more testing on it first before he changes instructions

[HWK]

yes u do, as ffvideosource is currently in the test stage. jdobbs posted a few posts back he likes more testing on it first before he changes instructions

Oh, I see that make sense.

[HWK]

Jdobbs, I wanted to ask would it be possible to add option to choose x264 preset very slow.
Right know if user choose ultra high quality, it sets --preset slower in lastcmd.

Also can you add option to change b-adapt

[jdobbs]

Jdobbs, I wanted to ask would it be possible to add option to choose x264 preset very slow.
Right know if user choose ultra high quality, it sets --preset slower in lastcmd.

Also can you add option to change b-adaptSetting "Highest (Very Slow) selects the "--preset slow"

[HWK]

I was referring x264 preset.

[omegaman7]

Unless I'm mistaken, MP4 does not support select-able subtitles. Which poses a problem for movies, where there are foreign language speaking areas and english subs needed. Aka forced subtitles. Avatar, Captain america Winter soldier to name a few.

I generally use Bd rebuilder for BD-50 - BD-25 backups. But sometimes I do generate MP4 backups. Any chance of hardcoding subtitles in the future? At the very least, the forced subs.

Feel free to put this on the back most burner ;) There are other tools that can accomplish this for the time being.

[soneca]

Logically would be the number 5 option, since the active option 4 equals --slower

[jdobbs]

I was referring x264 preset.So was I.

[jdobbs]

Unless I'm mistaken, MP4 does not support select-able subtitles. Which poses a problem for movies, where there are foreign language speaking areas and english subs needed. Aka forced subtitles. Avatar, Captain america Winter soldier to name a few.

I generally use Bd rebuilder for BD-50 - BD-25 backups. But sometimes I do generate MP4 backups. Any chance of hardcoding subtitles in the future? At the very least, the forced subs.

Feel free to put this on the back most burner ;) There are other tools that can accomplish this for the time being.I've looked at that in the past. It's not easy to do from within a program and requires a huge AVS if doing it from AVISYNTH.

[omegaman7]

I've looked at that in the past. It's not easy to do from within a program and requires a huge AVS if doing it from AVISYNTH.

Appreciate your response on this matter. This is a VERY rare case indeed, that I require MP4 subtitles. Sounds like it's more trouble than it's worth. No problem :)

[HWK]

So was I.

Ok, it seems there was miscommunication or I didn't get point across.

X264 preset values

ultrafast, superfast, veryfast, faster, fast, medium, slow, slower, veryslow, placebo.

When user choose ultra high quality in bd-rb via hidden setting it prints preset slower in lastcmd and then x264 uses slower preset. I wanted if veryslow can also be used in same way slower is used for ultra high quality. Prehaps hidden setting.

[jdobbs]

Ok, it seems there was miscommunication or I didn't get point across.

X264 preset values

ultrafast, superfast, veryfast, faster, fast, medium, slow, slower, veryslow, placebo.

When user choose ultra high quality in bd-rb via hidden setting it prints preset slower in lastcmd and then x264 uses slower preset. I wanted if veryslow can also be used in same way slower is used for ultra high quality. Prehaps hidden setting.Ok, from your original post I thought you were trying to set it to "slower". I'll look at adding it -- but I wouldn't recommend it, as it is overkill and the benefit is slight compared to "slower".

You can try:

TWEAK_PASS_ONE=--preset veryslow
TWEAK_PASS_TWO=--preset veryslow

But some of the resulting settings might possibly be incompatible with the BD standard (as it overrides settings earlier in the command line). When BD-RB uses a preset it puts it first, and then overrides some of the settings later in the command line to keep it compatible. I'd have to examine all the settings associated with that preset and correct any incompatibilities before I could implement it. For example, that preset may have the number of bframes set to some incompatible level or have a super long GOP as its default (I'm just throwing out things).

[mparade]

If not for anything else just for testing it would be great! I am a CRF guy, so I would take on testing if ever was included in BD-RB. I think jdobbs has very solid reasons why he did not add in these profiles so far (very slow and placebo). Anyway it would great to test them. :D

@jdobbs

Is TWEAK_PASS_ONE works for CRF encode?

[HWK]

Ok, from your original post I thought you were trying to set it to "slower". I'll look at adding it -- but I wouldn't recommend it, as it is overkill and the benefit is slight compared to "slower".

You can try:

TWEAK_PASS_ONE=--preset veryslow
TWEAK_PASS_TWO=--preset veryslow

But some of the resulting settings might possibly be incompatible with the BD standard (as it overrides settings earlier in the command line). When BD-RB uses a preset it puts it first, and then overrides some of the settings later in the command line to keep it compatible.

Tweak won't accept it, also x264 will keeping setting in check if blu-ray compatible flag is set.

I was reading document authoring blu-ray using x264 and that is where I got it form.

[jdobbs]

If not for anything else just for testing it would be great! I am a CRF guy, so I would take on testing if ever was included in BD-RB. I think jdobbs has very solid reasons why he did not add in these profiles so far (very slow and placebo). Anyway it would great to test them. :D

@jdobbs

Is TWEAK_PASS_ONE works for CRF encode?It should.

[jdobbs]

Tweak won't accept it, also x264 will keeping setting in check if blu-ray compatible flag is set.

I was reading document authoring blu-ray using x264 and that is where I got it form.Oh yeah. I forgot I have a check to prevent incompatible settings, including "preset"...

No... X264's blu-ray compatible won't keep it in check. If I understand it correctly, and I think I do, when the blu-ray compatible setting is earlier in the command line than another command, the individual settings associated with it will be overridden by the later settings.

[HWK]

Jdobbs, you may want to look at this page

http://www.x264bluray.com/home/1080i-p

You will see x264 preset is veryslow with --bluray-compat option added. Other option will needed to but I am not refering to those since program always add them. So if we replace --preset slower > --preset veryslow and leave everything else it will work.

[jdobbs]

Jdobbs, you may want to look at this page

http://www.x264bluray.com/home/1080i-p

You will see x264 preset is veryslow with --bluray-compat option added. Other option will needed to but I am not refering to those since program always add them. So if we replace --preset slower > --preset veryslow and leave everything else it will work.Yes... it's just as I said. The reason that one works is because the --bluray-compat" is put into the command line after the "--preset slower" -- but the tweak commands are added to the end of the command line.

I also like to set the individual settings to keep things under my control.

The bottom line is that I will look at it -- but it is a very low priority because I think "very slow" is pretty much as placebo as "placebo" for BD usage. If you can't tell the difference -- then what's the point of making your encode take longer?

[HWK]

Ok, let me put other way. Forget about tweaks and all other stuff. If you added ENCODE_QUALITY=5 and it will instructs to use preset veryslow instead of slower for x264.
I know it is placebo, but just hack of it :p

[jdobbs]

I already gave my answer. :) I think you'll find that many of the things that make "very slow" a unique preset from the others will go away anyway when you add blu-ray as an option after it on the command line. You just don't see all the things that get negated.

[HWK]

I already gave my answer. :)

No, problem ;) I can always do separately if needed :p

[HWK]

I already gave my answer. :) I think you'll find that many of the things that make "very slow" a unique preset from the others will go away anyway when you add blu-ray as an option after it on the command line. You just don't see all the things that get negated.

Yep, I did few and it completely changes. On a side note may I recommend to take out this option from hidden options "WEIGHTP=n n = 0/1/2 - Value used by BD-RB in X264 command line "--weightp", default is "1"

since x264 ignores it, no matter if --bluray-compat is set.

[mparade]

Yes... it's just as I said. The reason that one works is because the --bluray-compat" is put into the command line after the "--preset slower" -- but the tweak commands are added to the end of the command line.

I also like to set the individual settings to keep things under my control.

The bottom line is that I will look at it -- but it is a very low priority because I think "very slow" is pretty much as placebo as "placebo" for BD usage. If you can't tell the difference -- then what's the point of making your encode take longer?

If you would ever include those presets in BD-RB I would test how much that extra compression would be gained going from "Slower" to "Very Slow" and from "Very Slow" to "Placebo" using a fixed CRF value. I think it would be very slight, if any, but I would test it for an eventually better efficiency (~identical quality at a lower bitrate).

[DoctorM]

Speaking of quality presets, since I rebuilt my PC, I keep the AUTO_BIAS=3. When making BD25's I rarely see much difference in the quality chosen.

While I don't need everything done on 'Very Slow', most things end up normal or faster. It would be nice if there was more of a separation... or a AUTO_BIAS=4.

[soneca]

Ok, let me put other way. Forget about tweaks and all other stuff. If you added ENCODE_QUALITY=5 and it will instructs to use preset veryslow instead of slower for x264.
I know it is placebo, but just hack of it :p

From time to time I used the preset --veryslow unrestricted in crf mode(16 ref frames) to save about 10% space. I never noticed any difference.
Never used, I think 10% of space does not compensate the excess of energy expended. :p

[jdobbs]

Yep, I did few and it completely changes. On a side note may I recommend to take out this option from hidden options "WEIGHTP=n n = 0/1/2 - Value used by BD-RB in X264 command line "--weightp", default is "1"

since x264 ignores it, no matter if --bluray-compat is set.It's the same point I made earlier, it shouldn't ignore it if the line is added after the "--bluray-compat" in the command line.

[laserfan]

Ha, ha all you --preset veryslow guys need more to do. ;) Or maybe that's the idea--while your computer is off cranking-on bits you can take-up a new hobby.

:p :D

The first BD I ever made, when BD-RB was just a gleam in jdobbs' eye but using the ideas he had about encodings, I tried making a DVD-5 1080p of Live Free or Die Hard. Thought it wouldn't work or if it did would look like crap, and omigosh even at 3,500Kbps bitrate the thing was amazing. I'll have to get that disc out, from 2008, and see if it was just that my eyes were untrained at that time, but I don't think so.

I understand the obsession with quality, I really do, but at some point you just have to say "I do this to enjoy the art; why spend any more time fiddling with encodings than I need to".

[HWK]

It's the same point I made earlier, it shouldn't ignore it if the line is added after the "--bluray-compat" in the command line.

According to "Lastcmd" contents weightp appear after --bluray-compat but x264 still doesn't accept it's value.

"D:\BD-RB\tools\x264-64.exe" "K:\BDMV\STREAM\00042.m2ts" --preset slower --bluray-compat --ref 4 --b-adapt 1 --demuxer lavf --fps 24000/1001 --b-pyramid strict --weightp 2 --qpmin=0 --bitrate 10803 --level 4.1 --sar 1:1 --aud --nal-hrd vbr --pic-struct --vbv-bufsize 13000 --keyint 48 --min-keyint 1 --ipratio 1.1 --pbratio 1.1 --vbv-maxrate 15000 --threads auto --slices 4 --thread-input --tune film --stats "D:\BD-RB\WORKFILES\00042.m2ts.264.stats" --pass 2 --output "D:\BD-RB\WORKFILES\00042.m2ts.264"

When I check with media info it says weightp=1 and no I didn't modify file.
On a side note I don't see qpfile anymore for chapters, did you remove that?

[jdobbs]

According to "Lastcmd" contents weightp appear after --bluray-compat but x264 still doesn't accept it's value.



When I check with media info it says weightp=1 and no I didn't modify file.
On a side note I don't see qpfile anymore for chapters, did you remove that?I'll do some testing with the weightp settings and see what's up.

BD-RB puts in --qpfile if a .CHP file exists for that source. If there are chapters defined the .CHP should be there.

[HWK]

Jdobbs, chp file is being created in WORKFILES, however qpfile never make it way through in lastcmd. As a result x264 doesn't insert IDR frame.
I recently did another movie to test my findings. Can you perform check on that as well?

[HWK]

I'll do some testing with the weightp settings and see what's up.

BD-RB puts in --qpfile if a .CHP file exists for that source. If there are chapters defined the .CHP should be there.

Just want to add if weightp value is 2, x264 switch it to 1

It goes like this

weightp=0 > output video has weightp value of 0
weightp=1 > output video has weightp value of 1
weightp=2 > output video has weightp value of 1

[jdobbs]

Jdobbs, chp file is being created in WORKFILES, however qpfile never make it way through in lastcmd. As a result x264 doesn't insert IDR frame.
I recently did another movie to test my findings. Can you perform check on that as well?I just tested it and it works correctly. If you're not getting the .CHP file, that means no chapters are defined in the MPLS. Are you using a commercial source, or is this one you created yourself?

The LASTCMD file in my test properly includes the --qpfile parameter.

[HWK]

I just tested it and it works correctly. If you're not getting the .CHP file, that means no chapters are defined in the MPLS. Are you using a commercial source, or is this one you created yourself?

Yes, indeed I am using commercial source. (Lego movie to be exact)

Let me try another one and see if lego is issue.

[jdobbs]

Yes, indeed I am using commercial source. (Lego movie to be exact)

Let me try another one and see if lego is issue.I just noticed you're using LAVF and I was using the defaults. Let me check and see if LAVF chapter works as well.

[Edit] Yep that's it. It's not a big deal, as it just means a chapter point may be a 1/2 second off in actually seeking when LAVF was used for the reencode. But I'll fix it.

[Edit] It was fixed and is included in the new version (in the bug reporting thread).

[HWK]

I just noticed you're using LAVF and I was using the defaults. Let me check and see if LAVF chapter works as well.

[Edit] Yep that's it. It's not a big deal, as it just means a chapter point may be a 1/2 second off in actually seeking when LAVF was used for the reencode. But I'll fix it.

[Edit] It was fixed and is included in the new version (in the bug reporting thread).

Thank you, for fixing the issue.

[DoctorM]

Ha, ha all you --preset veryslow guys need more to do. ;) Or maybe that's the idea--while your computer is off cranking-on bits you can take-up a new hobby.

Don't get me wrong, I do BD5's when the quality/compressibility allows it, but not all sources are created equal.

A long film with a lot of grain and motion, even going to a BD25, can be noticeably softer if you don't bump the quality.

Which brings me to a feature request.
How about when BDRB determines that a 2-PASS encoding should be used, that it can perform a compressibility test.

Have a SelectRangeEvery script that test encodes and compares a fixed CRF value to the % compression achieved. It could then determine what the quality setting should be? The test would only really need to be done for the main video.

For example:
The compression needed to fit the media is 60% for a Two Pass encoding.

A test script encodes a couple percent of the film and determines a CRF value of 24 at High Quality/Normal cannot achieve 60% compression. Instead it only reaches 65%.

Quality is bumped to Highest/Very Slow and a second encoding of the test clip hits 59% compression.

So Very Slow is used for the 2-pass full encoding.

Conversely if the test encoding at Normal achieved 50% compression, Fast, Very Fast and High Speed BD-25+ can be tested until the compression is <= 60%.

A specific CRF value can then be associated with each AUTO_BIAS tier and output quality would be more consistent between encodes. Something like:
AUTO_BIAS of 0 = CRF of 28
AUTO_BIAS of 1 = CRF of 24
AUTO_BIAS of 2 = CRF of 20
AUTO_BIAS of 3 = CRF of 16

Of course that's 1080p. Different CRF values would be needed for 720p and 480 sources. Probably just shifting everything down 2 points for 720p and 2 more for standard definition would work fine.

I really like this idea because I already manually do something similar before doing a full encode. I'll set BDRB for one pass encoding, let it find the CRF value of the main movie, and then adjust my quality setting (or strip some stuff) if the CRF is unacceptably high.

[jdobbs]

Don't get me wrong, I do BD5's when the quality/compressibility allows it, but not all sources are created equal.

A long film with a lot of grain and motion, even going to a BD25, can be noticeably softer if you don't bump the quality.

Which brings me to a feature request.
How about when BDRB determines that a 2-PASS encoding should be used, that it can perform a compressibility test.

Have a SelectRangeEvery script that test encodes and compares a fixed CRF value to the % compression achieved. It could then determine what the quality setting should be? The test would only really need to be done for the main video.

For example:
The compression needed to fit the media is 60% for a Two Pass encoding.

A test script encodes a couple percent of the film and determines a CRF value of 24 at High Quality/Normal cannot achieve 60% compression. Instead it only reaches 65%.

Quality is bumped to Highest/Very Slow and a second encoding of the test clip hits 59% compression.

So Very Slow is used for the 2-pass full encoding.

Conversely if the test encoding at Normal achieved 50% compression, Fast, Very Fast and High Speed BD-25+ can be tested until the compression is <= 60%.

A specific CRF value can then be associated with each AUTO_BIAS tier and output quality would be more consistent between encodes. Something like:
AUTO_BIAS of 0 = CRF of 28
AUTO_BIAS of 1 = CRF of 24
AUTO_BIAS of 2 = CRF of 20
AUTO_BIAS of 3 = CRF of 16

Of course that's 1080p. Different CRF values would be needed for 720p and 480 sources. Probably just shifting everything down 2 points for 720p and 2 more for standard definition would work fine.

I really like this idea because I already manually do something similar before doing a full encode. I'll set BDRB for one pass encoding, let it find the CRF value of the main movie, and then adjust my quality setting (or strip some stuff) if the CRF is unacceptably high.I like the idea. But I'm not sure whether the time constraints would make it feasible. It may be something that could be enabled with a hidden switch. I'll do some testing.

[DoctorM]

I like the idea. But I'm not sure whether the time constraints would make it feasible. It may be something that could be enabled with a hidden switch. I'll do some testing.
Cool. I'm good with that being a hidden feature. Not everyone has a system fast enough to waste time test encoding.

[laserfan]

Regarding this comment you made in the bugs thread:

I do testing before posting -- but BD-RB has gotten to a point where there are so many options and interdependencies that I just can't test them all. That's when I rely on people like you.
I have occasionally found the need to go thru my .INI file and *try to* either find something in there, or compare it to an older .INI that I saved, and it gives me a headache because nothing is in any kind of order e.g. Alphabetic for example.

I don't know if there's any possibility for BD-RB e.g. to auto-sort the .INI file, or at least organize it in some logical way, but thought I'd throw this out there anyway.

p.s. I watched the Live Free or Die Hard backup I made 6 years ago, and it's astonishing how good it is at average BR of 3.5Mbps. And talk about an "over-the-top" movie from an action sequences POV! :eek:

[mparade]

I have tested this "updated" feature in 48.03 with the new frame server. Worked great! Thank you very much for this professional program.

[mparade]

@jdobbs

After using hiddenopt

TWEAK_PASS_ONE=--preset veryslow
it seemed that BD-RB had not considered it. The LASTCMD did not include this option at all.

Perhaps I made some mistake or BD-RB did not let this option insert at the end of the command line.

I know using this preset is a very low priority, however, your help would be really appreciated.

[Sharc]

@jdobbs
I tried to import 1440x1080i25 (intended for 16:9 DAR) videocam files. Works great now but I am getting the ERROR message:
[12:02:42] Importing M2TS: 00005
- Preparing M2TS for processing...
[12:02:46]ERROR: Gathering source file information. Aborted.
[12:02:46]ERROR: Gathering source file information. Aborted.
- Collecting audio/video streams from source...
- Building pseudo-BD source structure...
[12:02:54] Video import completed successfully.
The error seems to have no consequence as I can proceed and finalize the encoding without issues.

P.S.
For importing I have to manually rename the file extension from the original .mts to .m2ts. Could this be the cause?

[Sharc]

....p.s. I watched the Live Free or Die Hard backup I made 6 years ago, and it's astonishing how good it is at average BR of 3.5Mbps. And talk about an "over-the-top" movie from an action sequences POV! :eek:
Absolutely. I made all my backups to BD5 or BD9 and changed to BD25 only recently, mainly because my new player is picky with BD5/9 with menus.
2 full HD movie-only backups on a BD25 with Quick Menu look great.

[jdobbs]

@jdobbs

After using hiddenopt

TWEAK_PASS_ONE=--preset veryslow
it seemed that BD-RB had not considered it. The LASTCMD did not include this option at all.

Perhaps I made some mistake or BD-RB did not let this option insert at the end of the command line.

I know using this preset is a very low priority, however, your help would be really appreciated.We already talked about that.

[jdobbs]

Ok, let me put other way. Forget about tweaks and all other stuff. If you added ENCODE_QUALITY=5 and it will instructs to use preset veryslow instead of slower for x264.
I know it is placebo, but just hack of it :pOk. I've added a new hidden option just for you. It'll be in the next release. QUALITY_ULTRA will allow you to select what preset you'd like used when the undocumented Ultra-Quality option is selected. You can set it to "slower", "veryslow", or "placebo"

It is there for the sake of those who feel the need -- but I certainly wouldn't recommend it.

[Sharc]

Ok. I've added a new hidden option just for you. It'll be in the next release. QUALITY_ULTRA will allow you to select what preset you'd like used when the undocumented Ultra-Quality option is selected. You can set it to "slower", "veryslow", or "placebo"

It is there for the sake of those who feel the need -- but I certainly wouldn't recommend it.
Hmmm.... why not just make a (hidden) option for full custom command line to satisfy all the tweaking ideas and ambitions -- and reject any support for it?

[jdobbs]

Yeah... "reject any support" is fine in concept. But it fails in reality. People will edit their logs -- and even post bad press about your software because they are too clueless to know the problem was self-inflicted. I'm not going that route again.

[Sharc]

Yes, fully understood. You talk by experience.....

[HWK]

Ok. I've added a new hidden option just for you. It'll be in the next release. QUALITY_ULTRA will allow you to select what preset you'd like used when the undocumented Ultra-Quality option is selected. You can set it to "slower", "veryslow", or "placebo"

It is there for the sake of those who feel the need -- but I certainly wouldn't recommend it.

Thank you, for consideration and I really appreciate it.