fix x264

[marcio]

fix this thing. 700mb movie rips with x264 looks terribad in high motion scenes.

xvid is old as hell and looks better.

that qcomp variable in x264 is so off at 0.6 for every bitrate. it sucks for low bitrates.

of course end-user can raise it to 0.8 or 0.9, but most people don't know how to do it, and it is hard to find the sweet spot for it. 0.6 is good for 1080p, but terribad for low bitrates.

the coders from xvid where much more talented, they created a very balanced codec, with perfect and simple variables.

I wish x264 coders were replaced with the coders from xvid... I am sure they would make things much better in x264.

fix this qcomp issue, the encoder should find the sweet spot for the end user automaticaly in 2pass mode, based on the first pass data, bitrate, etc...

[burfadel]

I think more info would help if there is an issue to be resolved.

What settings are you using? what version of x264? which binary are you using? (there's several compiles of x264), what decoders and filters are you using?

Comparisons with --me dia --subme 1 etc are invalid, considering there is --me umh and --subme 10. Comparisons with x264 rev 600 etc are invalid (latest is at the moment, 1834). VFW (non-official now) vs CLI not valid either.

[marcio]

oh please...
i won't be making sample videos, comparisons, or showing details about it, etc...

If you don't know what I am talking about, then you have only used x264 in some especific scenario where this problem doesn't show.

After months, I learned how to set qcomp manually, based on how high motion the footage has, the bitrate, and other variables such as AQ and others...

So if they don't fix it, it won't be a problem for me, but most people out there will get crap results.

[Mug Funky]

could you post at least the settings you're using?

trolls don't post their settings. they just make outrageous claims not observed by anyone else.

you're not a troll are you?

[Wishbringer]

I made some conversions to fit 22 SD TV episodes onto DVD+DL, so each 44 minutes episode had to be 388 MB.

None of them had a bad quality. each of them had nearly quality of original material.

Before complaining about x264, you should follow burfadels advice and post your settings and revision of x264.
He didn't asked you for samples and comparisions.

[marcio]

I don't know what you are talking about.

You want settings? Here is one for you.

--placebo

Try that with a war movie, or some movie with lots of high motion, with low bitrate (something that gives 700MB file size).

It will look like crap in high motion scenes, and are you going to blame --placebo?

You will need to raise qcomp to about 0.8 in this scenario.
A low AQ (0.9) or so might be needed too, and will help the high motion scenes too, and MAYBE a higher GOP size.

BUT

If your movie is not a war movie or high motion movie, you don't need (or want) to set qcomp so high. So that makes things complicated and hard to find the sweet spot.

AND

For 720p and 1080p, the default settings qcomp 0.6 is ideal (maybe 0.7 for 720p in some cases), so you don't want to change.

Try to put a high motion movie into 700MB with x264 and default qcomp, and than come back here and tell me how the high motion looked like.

[Dark Shikari]

Obvious troll thread (http://doom10.org/index.php?topic=1065.0)

[marcio]

I posted this thread in doom10 also, and that makes me a troll?

Look, if you don't know how to use the 1st pass data to estimate the correct qcomp, just send me a PM and I will tell you how to do it ok?

[Blue_MiSfit]

oh please...
i won't be making sample videos, comparisons, or showing details about it, etc...

If you don't know what I am talking about, then you have only used x264 in some especific scenario where this problem doesn't show.


I strongly disagree. I've used x264 to encode literally tens of thousands of videos, typically ranging from 600kbps 480p to 10mbps 1080p . No encoder is literally perfect, but nothing in all my experience makes me think you're actually presenting facts here.

Please provide samples, and voice your concerns in a more respectful manor. Otherwise, who can blame anyone for concluding you're just a troll? You haven't even told us what build of x264 you're using!

If you're not willing to conduct yourself in a civilized manor on doom9, please troll elsewhere.

Derek

[Dark Shikari]

I posted this thread in doom10 also, and that makes me a troll?

Look, if you don't know how to use the 1st pass data to estimate the correct qcomp, just send me a PM and I will tell you how to do it ok?x264 doesn't even use the qcomp algorithm (at least by default), so yes, you're a clueless troll.

Also, Xvid never used qcomp either.

[marcio]

I strongly disagree. I've used x264 to encode literally tens of thousands of videos, typically ranging from 600kbps 480p to 10mbps 1080p . No encoder is literally perfect, but nothing in all my experience makes me think you're actually presenting facts here.

Please provide samples, and voice your concerns in a more respectful manor. Otherwise, who can blame anyone for concluding you're just a troll?

Derek

I am not a troll. For sure if you are encoding 600kbps 480p footage with default qcomp 0.6, and you are calling that quality GOOD, either you are encoding footage with little or non high motion scenes, or your eyes are broken.

I am not going to lose my time doing tests and comparisons to post here.

If you want, you can do them. Take high motion footage, something like save private ryan, apocalypse now, etc...

encode it with 600kbps 720x480 with default qcomp 0.6, and I am sure you will see that looks terribad in the high motion scenes, almost unwatchable.

Sorry, but I am not doing this tests for you, I thought people using x264 a lot would know about this.

[marcio]

x264 doesn't even use the qcomp algorithm (at least by default), so yes, you're a clueless troll.

Also, Xvid never used qcomp either.

And who said it was? Learn how to read, I said IT SHOULD START TO USE IT CORRECTLY, based on the 1st pass data.

What a fail.

Also, who said xvid was using qcomp? Where did I say that? What a fail again.

[Blue_MiSfit]

Nobody's saying 600kbps 480p is going to look fantastic :)

You're trying to convince us that if we were to encode Apocalypse Now with both x264 and Xvid, targeting 700mb (which, with a 96kbps MP3 track as is common for such trash would mean about 525kbps for the video), the latter would do a better job?

It's clear you're not interested in having a productive discussion here, but rather are just trying to fan the flames.