DivX 5.0.2 + Qpel + Strong PsychoVisual = BEST QUALITY EVER

[Snollygoster]

OK, listen to this. After reading Gej's suggestion about encoding stuff, and after being so impressed with the quality of the Warcraft III trailer I decided that I should give a try to the settings...

So,

Source: PAL DVD (O Brother Where Art Thou & Requiem for a Dream)

Encoding:
2CDs
Avisynth + SimpleResize
DivX 5.0.2 (B-frames, GMC, Qpel, Strong Psychovisual)
All quantizers set to default (as Gej says these settings are the best)
AC3 448 kbps.

THE QUALITY I GET IS SUPERB. Better than SBC. No pixelation, no blurry picture, no artifacts!

ONLY (-) is the Encoding Speed...

What do you say?

[yingx2]

I've noticed that having GMC and psychovisual enhancement(especially strong)both on results in a "moving sky" or "moving wall" artifact in low/medium bitrate encoding, like 1000kbps.

I had done some tests. At first, I thought the PE feature was pretty good since it helped reduce the file size without losing visible quality for 100% quality-based encodes.

But when I do a 950kbps 1 CD rip, those "moving sky" artifacts(microblocks floating up and down) become quite annoying.

If you disable PE, the same sky would be much more "stable".

[Awatef]

PE is crap in my experience!
It makes things more blocky and makes drawing lines as if they were bloody, I mean, they look awful.

And one can't use QPel, unless one goes for example from 640x480 to 320x240.

And SimpleResize is crap if you're resizing in 2 directions, something like 640x480 to 512x384, it makes too much jaggies

[Snollygoster]

I noticed about simpleresize...

But for me PE WORKS ABSOLUTELY PERFECT and Qpel = No Blocks...

[JimmyBarnes]

Originally posted by Snollygoster
OK, listen to this. After reading Gej's suggestion about encoding stuff, and after being so impressed with the quality of the Warcraft III trailer I decided that I should give a try to the settings...

Source: PAL DVD (O Brother Where Art Thou & Requiem for a Dream)

THE QUALITY I GET IS SUPERB. Better than SBC. No pixelation, no blurry picture, no artifacts!

Let us know what happens with further rips, especially of very different types of movie.

BTW how many SBC rips have you done?

thanx
JB

[JimmyBarnes]

Originally posted by Snollygoster
OK, listen to this. After reading Gej's suggestion about encoding stuff, and after being so impressed with the quality of the Warcraft III trailer I decided that I should give a try to the settings...

Source: PAL DVD (O Brother Where Art Thou & Requiem for a Dream)

THE QUALITY I GET IS SUPERB. Better than SBC. No pixelation, no blurry picture, no artifacts!

Let us know what happens with further rips (say at least another 5), especially of very different types of movie.

BTW how many SBC rips have you done?

thanx
JB

[Snollygoster]

OK I am doing 2 more this evening. Before even DivX 4 was out (when we still had DivX 3.11a, DivX 3.22 which sucked and DivX 4 beta -project mahyo-) I did around 100 or more movies purely in NanDub when the AntiShit first got implemented.

[Dreassica]

He is right, it worked on my PAL DVD rip too, almost no pixelations and blocks anymore!!

[JimmyBarnes]

Originally posted by Dreassica
He is right, it worked on my PAL DVD rip too, almost no pixelations and blocks anymore!!

1CD or 2CD rip?

Any idea of 1st pass %?

thanx
JB

[kilg0r3]

1CD or 2CD rip?

Any idea of 1st pass %?

Yeah, please pretty please, try to be a little more precise in your posts. i know this borders on real work, but as long as you don't post parameters like resolution, bitrate, quality settings, filters, etc., your posts are prety useless for your readers.

[Dreassica]

It's not a movie..it's a anime DVD (Dragonball Z), so i can't say if it's a 1 or a 2 CD rip. I can tell u that i encoded it at 1250kbps and that it's 200mb in filesize(a 20 minute episode)at a resolution of 512/384. I used 3 filters in Vdub,warpsharp,smarth smother HQ and 2d cleaner

[Snollygoster]

The test was on 2 x 700MB CDs.

I just did Blade Runner 1 CD Rip and I am satisfied (of course the quality is not the same as 2 CD)

IMPORTANT: I tried QPel without Psychovisual and it gave me shitty results...

[Shuichiro]

so... I tried it too with my Spriggan (Anime) PAL DVD

I made a DivX 5.0.2 1CD Rip (Length aprox. 90min) with GKnot. All features on and PV strong. Resolution was 600x352

The Result: Very good Quality! Better than with B-Frames + GMC
and also only GMC. Even better than without any Dix5Pro features

:)

[Shuichiro]

I made another DVD-RIP (PAL BUFFY DVD) with these settings and ended in an totally messed up AVI. :(

[mikeson]

When using Qpel while slow camera panning, motion is jekry. It looks like codec is skipping some frames. It's a pitty, because Qpel gives me very good results otherwise. Also some ugly artifacts appeared (blinking macroblocks).

Encoding:
2CDs (only cropping, bitrate 1200-1800)
Avisynth + Neutral Bicubic Resize
DivX 5.0.2 (B-frames, GMC, Qpel, Strong Psychovisual)
All quantizers set to default
VBR MP3

Tried Forrest Gump, The Rock, Con Air, Final Fantasy and U Turn. Quality is great, but because of things mentioned above, I can't use Qpel feature.

[Dreassica]

If u said that u only cropped, why have u stated that u used a resize method (neutral bicubic)?
Or did u mean only cropping in avisynth and doing the resizing with the divX codec itself?

[kilg0r3]

because the source material was anamorphic?

[mikeson]

If u said that u only cropped, why have u stated that u used a resize method (neutral bicubic)?

Vertical resize is always done if you want to get correct aspect ratio. Original DVD resolution is mostly 720x576. So if you want resolution like 720x288 (Matrix - PAL, only cropping), you have to do vertical resize. But I'm sure you know that, so I don't get your question... :confused:

[evilhomer]

It's 2:23:00, just for experimenting i tried to fit it on 1 CD (R1, NTSC). Using q-pel I could actually get good (good being relative, I mean decent) quality(!!) I ripped it 5 times with b-frames and gmc:

1.) neutral bicubic
2.) bilinear
3.) bilinear with light noise filter
4.) bilinear with light noise and psycho set to light
5.) bilinear with light noice, psycho light and finally q-pel

number 5 was far and away the best. i didn't like the movie that much, so instead of putting it on 2cd's i'm keeping it. Keep in mind my resolution is very low, 416x128 (compress check 77.7%)

[mikeson]

I'm a little bit confused now. When I had tried to play panning scenes of movie with Qpel, I've noticed sometimes it is playing smoothly and sometimes jerky (the same scene)!! :confused:

I know that movie with all MPEG4 features enabled and high resolution takes very much from CPU, but my system is not so slow...

Athlon 1.3GHz@1.45GHz (111MHz FSB)
512MB RAM KINGMAX 150MHz
ABIT KT7-RAID
GeForce4 4400
SBLive!
Western Digital 120GB (8MB cache)
running WinXP PRO

All post-procesing and film effect disabled. No new decoder features enabled.

Movie was Final Fantasy PAL. For example scene on 53:03 (running from prison).

So maybe its some weird (or bug) in decoder or DS filter. I don't know...

Otherwise quality with Qpel is much better (less or none macroblocks, more details).

[Cokes]

Originally posted by Snollygoster
Source: PAL DVD (O Brother Where Art Thou & Requiem for a Dream)

Encoding:
2CDs
Avisynth + SimpleResize
DivX 5.0.2 (B-frames, GMC, Qpel, Strong Psychovisual)
All quantizers set to default (as Gej says these settings are the best)
AC3 448 kbps.

THE QUALITY I GET IS SUPERB. Better than SBC. No pixelation, no blurry picture, no artifacts!

ONLY (-) is the Encoding Speed...

What do you say?

I agree, Jurassic Park III on 1 XCD (815 MB):
1 CD 640x352
Avisynth + Bicubic at 0.75 for movie (1153 kbps) + SimpleResize for credits (1 pass at quantization 20)
DivX 5.0.2 (B-frames, GMC, Qpel, Strong Psychovisual)
2x Vorbis streams, each 99 kbps (OggMachine at 0.250).
2x SRT subtitles
all that in OGM.

Amazing quality.

Let's try Vertical Limit today...

[mikeson]

When using Qpel, panning is really jerky, but I think it is NOT error in codec, but in decoder. Because when I've tried ffdshow, everything was smooth.

[PeZzy]

I tried the settings recommended in this thread, and I did like the fact that it removed the floating macroblocks I was seeing in 'bright' areas when using the Divx5 directshow decoder. These macroblocks weren't visible with the latest ffdshow decoder, but ffdshow is unable to properly process psycho enhancements - makes the picture look a little over-exposed.

Unfortunately, playback on my computer increases the CPU load by 15% with the Divx5 decoder and 10% with the ffdshow filter. If you add vobsubs, the playback might freeze in spots.

[SirDavidGuy]

but ffdshow is unable to properly process psycho enhancements - makes the picture look a little over-exposed

This is really weird. Psy enhancements should even be compatible with the simple profile, let alone the advanced simple profile, unless everything that I have heard about it is a lie.

[ajmoss]

Does the removal of data by the psychovisual modelling process compromise the quality if you ever want to re-encode the video file?

[Ravendark]

I didn't like psy enhancements. I do not know why but I got a lot of blocks in some tests I made. The same settings without pe gave me better results and ofcourse a bit faster.

[ChannelK]

I did a 2 cd rip of the insider (2 1/4 hrs) and was in a rush setting it up so using Gknot only dropped to res, set the file size, disabled GMC and pressed GO! the result = superb, but I expect this is because the bitrate = 1500kbps (or so), not because of the choice or features/filters etc. used/not used.
My point is this, when trying to determine whether a filter/feature has a positive impact on a film, wouldnt it make more sense to encode for 1 cd W/ a low bit rate e.g 750 - 900 etc for testing purposes, as with a 1500kbps 2 cd encode, the result would probly look great with most combineations of features used. In my experience with D.5.02 (mostly PAL), a 2cd encode = great quality with no pro features at all, but for 1 cd, features can (and do) greatly improve performance.

(By features I mean everything else but B-frames)

[evilhomer]

yes, the insider is over 2 hours long, but it's also incredibly dark. black hides many articfacts, etc.

[Siku]

Hi there, does this "Qpel" mean same as "Use Quarter Pixel" in DivX 5.02 codec configurations?

And is there some difference with Qpel and without? Has someone tested it? It would be nice to see some screenshots.

:)

[DJ Bobo]

yes qpel is use quarter pel

don't even care about it, it's a function that is only usefull when you resize to the fourth, for example from 640x480 to 320x240.
And now how often do you resize that way? almost never.

[Acaila]

It has nothing to do with resizing, resizing is done by a filter. The codec has nothing to do with the resizing, because the picture is already resized before it is passed to the codec for compression.

It's a feature that aids motion estimation. The default way for DivX (and XviD) is to calculate motion between a pixel and it's neighbour (in adjacent frames) only down to half a pixel depth. Q-Pel increases this sensitivity to a quarter of a pixel at the cost of reduced encoding and decoding speed. Using it will increase the accuracy of motion estimation, but right now it's basically too slow to use.

[BluDChyLD]

Originally posted by ChannelK
(By features I mean everything else but B-frames)

Why not use b-frames? It's the most effective the the pro features and offers more compression with very little quality loss.

[manono]

Hi-

He was assuming the use of B-Frames, and not using the other pro features for 2 CD rips.

[DJ Bobo]

Kusoooooooo!!!!! Like always, I'm the last to know a thing like this right? damn! I could swear, I read it somewhere like I said above. But well, seems like I misunderstood something ¬.¬

Well, cancel it, cancel it... Acaila, man, mock me, will ya? why don't you show up more often?! Let me have some of your knowledge man!

[Acaila]

Sorry, I'm kinda busy IRL, but I try my best to visit whenever there is time. No mocking intended though.

Hmm...let me beam over some knowledge ok...sit tight, here it comes... ... ... shit my transporter is down...must be my computer sucking up all the juice. Sorry ;)

[BiaTch 5.0]

Originally posted by ChannelK
I did a 2 cd rip of the insider (2 1/4 hrs) and was in a rush setting it up so using Gknot only dropped to res, set the file size, disabled GMC and pressed GO! the result = superb, but I expect this is because the bitrate = 1500kbps (or so), not because of the choice or features/filters etc. used/not used.
My point is this, when trying to determine whether a filter/feature has a positive impact on a film, wouldnt it make more sense to encode for 1 cd W/ a low bit rate e.g 750 - 900 etc for testing purposes, as with a 1500kbps 2 cd encode, the result would probly look great with most combineations of features used. In my experience with D.5.02 (mostly PAL), a 2cd encode = great quality with no pro features at all, but for 1 cd, features can (and do) greatly improve performance.

(By features I mean everything else but B-frames)
O.K 1 or 3 CD is not important what COMPRESSIBILITY do you aim for using just B-frames?.

Also for this type of encoding [high COMPRESSIBILITY] why not use GMC & qpel?, if they only have decoder problems they can only be a +.

BTW I found psychovisual to give some excellent frames but is worthless(strong) because of a transparent ghost effect in some backgrounds with noise.

[BluDChyLD]

Originally posted by BiaTch 5.0

O.K 1 or 3 CD is not important what COMPRESSIBILITY do you aim for using just B-frames?.

Also for this type of encoding [high COMPRESSIBILITY] why not use GMC & qpel?, if they only have decoder problems they can only be a +.

BTW I found psychovisual to give some excellent frames but is worthless(strong) because of a transparent ghost effect in some backgrounds with noise.

Apparently qpel causes artifacts so I haven't used it, plus it puts a higher load on the cpu which could be a problem with older computers. What do you mean by the ghost effect with psychovisuals? I've kept it on strong for the past few movies i've encoded and I haven't noticed anything suspicious...

[BiaTch 5.0]

Originally posted by BluDChyLD


What do you mean by the ghost effect with psychovisuals? I've kept it on strong for the past few movies i've encoded and I haven't noticed anything suspicious...

Another description I can think of is a “moving water effect” in plain backgrounds. I first noticed this in Aliens S.E the scene when she is in the virtual forest she turns off the tv & starts talking to Berk, focus on the tv. Has anyone seen this?.

So the qpel block artifacts are not a decoder thing?.

[BluDChyLD]

i'm not sure about qpel, I've left it off ever since it was introduced with 5.0 when it caused problems. Maybe it's been fixed since then. Apparently it's only useful when resizing to by a certain degree (eg 640x480 to 320x240), can anyone verify this?

I know that the camera panning problem with gmc is decoder related, so that's safe to use.

About psychovisual enchancements, I tried a few "macroblock unfriendly" scenes in quality based mode with and with out it and as far as I could tell it had no impact on the picture quality (still moving blocks). The filesize is a lot smaller though so I've kept it on strong for all my recent rips.

[ChannelK]

QUOTE]O.K 1 or 3 CD is not important what COMPRESSIBILITY do you aim for using just B-frames?. [/QUOTE]

Well, when i used to do 2 cd rips only, i simply didnt bother about comp tests and stuff, simply because i was lazy and with progressive PAL dvds, its pretty hard to fail to get anything but superb 2 cd rips estimating the resolution based on experience and movie length, so i have no idea what sort of compessibiity most of my 2 cd rips were. However, now with one cd rips, i suppose every little bit counts, and so i am now doing comp. tests, editing / preveiwing different .avs script settings etc. to get every little last bit out of the encoder. For 1 cd, i aim for around 55%+ min, but usually my lovely little progressive PALs get 70 - 80%+.

(see Manono and theREALs posts near the end of this thread http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32723[/URL] for some good .avs ideas)

One more little trick i like, if I find an 80min cd just a little too small, overburning a 90min cd up to 94mins (using nero cd speed to test overburning capacitty, data stream 90min cds can fit 94.50sec of data - nice!) produces a nice lttile quality boost without the need for a second cd.

[ChannelK]

HAHA, I botched up that quote above!

[pixelfreak]

What's the PE Method you talking about by reducing the filesize on 100% 1pass quality based ripping ????

Is this method really better than the method with all the pro features ???

[BluDChyLD]

Originally posted by pixelfreak
What's the PE Method you talking about by reducing the filesize on 100% 1pass quality based ripping ????

Psychovisual enchancement works by discarding parts of the picture that the human eye can't see. As a result of this, if you encoded in 100% quality based you get a smaller file size with no visual differance.

However, it has a little to no effect on filesize when aiming for a certain target (700, 1400 etc...) so I assume it uses the space made by the discarded bits and reallocates it else where so you reach your target file size. If i'm right, theoretically you should have a better looking movie.

Is this method really better than the method with all the pro features ???

Not really, but you should use it in conjuction with the other pro feautures to acheive optimum filesize. Personally, I only use gmc and b-frames but you might want to leave gmc off because of the decoder bug.
Hope this helps,
BluDChyLD