--aq-mode 2 really that bad?

[asarian]

I just read up a bit on --aq-mode 2 with CRF. Seems it really deteriorates the quality of darker scenes. :( See: LINK (http://doom10.org/index.php?topic=136.0). Can someone confirm/debunk this, please?

[sneaker_ger]

The old aq-mode 2 discussed in that thread is no longer part of x264. It has been replaced by what was formerly known as aq-mode 4 in the mean time. As to whether the new aq-mode 2 has such problems: I don't know...

[asarian]

The old aq-mode 2 discussed in that thread is no longer part of x264. It has been replaced by what was formerly known as aq-mode 4 in the mean time. As to whether the new aq-mode 2 has such problems: I don't know...
Oh good; that's a relief at least. :) Thanks.

Any people out there who have experience with the new '--aq-mode 2' and CRF?

[STaRGaZeR]

Any people out there who have experience with the new '--aq-mode 2' and CRF?

My experience is that it looks much better than --aq-mode 1.

[asarian]

My experience is that it looks much better than --aq-mode 1.
Cool. Thanks for the feedback! I'll just disregard that whole old thread then and will start using it too on my major encodes.

[nurbs]

Something that might be interesting: I did a couple of CRF encodes and while the old --aq-mode 2 produced vastly different filesizes compared to mode 1 with the new one the sizes are almost the same. The author said he specifically designed it that way. The old mode also had problems working with mbtree.

[julius666]

My experience is that it looks much better than --aq-mode 1.

The same here. IMHO it should be default.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

Maybe the x264 help should be updated at least. Currently "--aq-mode 2" is labeled as "experimental". Maybe it should be labeled as a serious alternative now.

Background: I tried to convince the Avidemux developers to add AQ mode 2 to the GUI. But they say that they won't such add such "experimental" features to the GUI.

The same goes for Psy-Trellis. It's labeled as "experimental" in the help, but it is used regularly in some of the built-in presets at the same time...

[Dark Shikari]

Maybe the x264 help should be updated at least. Currently "--aq-mode 2" is labeled as "experimental". Maybe it should be labeled as a serious alternative now.

Background: I tried to convince the Avidemux developers to add AQ mode 2 to the GUI. But they say that they won't such add such "experimental" features to the GUI."Experimental" in x264 merely refers to psy features that we haven't decided to move to default yet. If they are willing to include interfaces for all kinds of other far less useful non-psy features, but not those two, it is likely that they are simply being needlessly thick.

I am not going to modify the help file to cater to people who believe that "experimental" means "not a serious alternative" or "should never be used". If it "wasn't a serious alternative", it wouldn't be in x264 to begin with.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

"Experimental" in x264 merely refers to psy features that we haven't decided to move to default yet. If they are willing to include interfaces for all kinds of other far less useful non-psy features, but not those two, it is likely that they are simply idiots.

I am not going to modify the help file to cater to idiots who believe that "experimental" means "not a serious alternative" or "should never be used". If it "wasn't a serious alternative", it wouldn't be in x264 to begin with.

Still I believe the word "experimental" might scare away people from using those options, although they can be useful indeed.

Especially since the help is (or should be) intended to be understood by Average Joe users. Why not simply use "alternative" or "optional" then?

IMHO calling people idiots, just because they say "huh, it's labeled as 'experimental', so I probably better don't touch it" isn't very helpful...

[Dark Shikari]

Especially since the help is (or should be) intended to be understood by Average Joe users."Average joe" users should not:

1. Be looking at anything beyond --help (aq-mode 2 is not listed there).

2. Be using any options beyond ratecontrol, preset, tune, and profile.

3. Be messing with "subme", let alone "aq-mode".

[Gser]

Some guis sicken me. "Works" like ripbot are an insult to the makers imo. There is no "one solution fits all". Words like "simple" and "easy" are never good. There are no "unnecessary settings" as they put it. If it was unnecessary it wouldn't be there in the first place. It's all just an excuse for the users to be completely ignorant about encoding videos.

[Blue_MiSfit]

No... you're quite incorrect Gser.

Not everyone has the time to become fully literate in all the options of x264. It's VERY easy to shoot one's self in the foot if you set the wrong things. Take for example the old x264 defaults before the introduction of the presets / profiles / tunings system! If you just did an encode specifying RC mode and bitrate you'd get something that was very poor (no CABAC, no 8x8dct, many other bad things).

For those of us that do want to know it all, there's CLI :devil:

Even I, as a power user, rarely override speed/quality settings beyond a given preset. These presets are VERY well chosen. I DO adjust everything else, but not the presets usually.

Derek

[yetanotherid]

Some guis sicken me. "Works" like ripbot are an insult to the makers imo. There is no "one solution fits all". Words like "simple" and "easy" are never good. There are no "unnecessary settings" as they put it. If it was unnecessary it wouldn't be there in the first place. It's all just an excuse for the users to be completely ignorant about encoding videos.

I'm not quite an average user. I probably sit somewhere just above being average but nowhere near "power" status.
I want to be average. I want to be ignorant. Well, at least to a certain extent. Just give me a GUI which does the job properly without me having to second guess what it's doing and I'll be happy. An updated AutoGK type GUI which encodes using H.264 would be perfect for me.