2h40 on 1 CD!!!

[Sirber]

Hi

I made The Messenger on 1 CD with AutoRV9. The quality is great for that kind of movie, and the sound... sound great :)

Audio: 64kbps (cook)
Video: 550kbps (RV9)

In some high motion scenes, the background is more blury, but the general quality is so great!!!!

I tryed that movie with Divx 5.0.2 and XviD (stable) and the quality wasn't there.

VIVA REALVIDEO 9!!!!!

[Koepi]

You should try dev-api-3/developer xvid builds. It's a bit unfair to compare xvid-stable (~features of divx4) with far advanced codecs.

Anyways, I'm glad you're happy with the results of the codec of your choice!

Regards
Koepi

[bond]

@sirber

plz post a screenshot so we can see what you mean with "the quality is so great" ;)

btw. did you also try wm9?

[chris25frfr]

which size do you use ?

650 Mb
700
more ?

[Sirber]

It's a 700 Mo.

@koepi

I bought the DVD 1 week ago. For my tests I ripped it long time ago while only XviD stable was avalible (I think). I like XviD unstable, but it's a bit too unstable for me at this state. DivX 5.0.x is worse than XviD stable.

@bond

I tryed WM9 but I don't like the way it is. I like to choose my bitrate and codec for audio and video. I like to be able to play my file on different OS / players. I also like the encoding speed, avalible filters, settings, RAW settings ;). Real is now for me the greatest video / audio codec avalible, for both quality and speed.

@all

When I say that the quality is so great, it's so great for a 2h40 movie on 1 CD. It has some bluriness in real-high motion scenes, and sharp low motion. Maybe I'll post screens... mouhahahahahaha. Hum... how can I take a creenshot with MPC+RV9 in overlay mode? :confused:

[Psymaster]

mouhahahahahaha. Hum... how can I take a creenshot with MPC+RV9 in overlay mode?

Directshowsource maybe?

[Ramirez]

Hmmm…interesting,no artifacts at all?.Anyway I'm gonna give it a try too.
Pearl Harbor 02:55:36> The Final Size let's say 750 Megs.

[CruNcher]

Originally posted by Ramirez
Hmmm…interesting,no artifacts at all?.Anyway I'm gonna give it a try too.
Pearl Harbor 02:55:36> The Final Size let's say 750 Megs.

I did Pearl Harbor in Xvid unstable Koepis build + normal lumimasking bitrate is around 419 kbps and without Qpel it looks really good will try it again with another build today with extreme ME

Final Size Video = 530 Mb

[^^-+I4004+-^^]

>I did Pearl Harbor in Xvid unstable Koepis build + normal lumimasking bitrate is around 419 kbps

so it was about 3xx x 2xx ?
cca 400kbit on mpeg4?
hmmmmmm

[tangent]

But.. but.. but.. I've done 3h20 of the Fellowship of the Ring extended edition on 1CD using XviD 512x208 and Vorbis ~45kbps. bpf came around to 0.176, I used FluxSmooth->Bilinear Resize->DCTFilter. Shot for 716MB which was as far as my CDs could overburn. Didn't keep the encode though, because there was async a/v, possibly because it was a bugged version of the unstable i used.

[CruNcher]

so it was about 3xx x 2xx ?
cca 400kbit on mpeg4?
hmmmmmm

lol no hehe 512x224 but as i said i do a new one with VHQ i hope it gets a tad better now got around 8 fps without vhq 11 fps
hope it makes the lose of b-frames acceptable compression wise we'll see :)

[Sirber]

This one was at 720x304@24FPS. It has some artefacts, but the general quality is nice.

[Ramirez]

Done. Avisynth2.5.no filtering whatsoever.720x304res.588kbps-video.44kbps-audio.770megs total (20 Megs Oversized?) I had to bring the audio down in order to achieve acceptable Results,and in general the results where more then impressive imo.
Looks really sux On High motion scenes with lots of smoke and explosions though.
But hey we're talking about almost 3 hours movie here.
Check out these screenshoots (somebody please explain to me what the hell happened to the first one.)

Edit:Fixed URL

1 (http://www.redzone.co.il/vad/PH/00.02.28.PNG) 2 (http://www.redzone.co.il/vad/PH/00.11.57.PNG) 3 (http://www.redzone.co.il/vad/PH/00.33.11.PNG) 4 (http://www.redzone.co.il/vad/PH/00.35.10.PNG) 5 (http://www.redzone.co.il/vad/PH/00.45.34.PNG) 6 (http://www.redzone.co.il/vad/PH/00.57.17.PNG) 7 (http://www.redzone.co.il/vad/PH/01.44.42.PNG) 8 (http://www.redzone.co.il/vad/PH/02.02.06.PNG) 9 (http://www.redzone.co.il/vad/PH/02.36.38.PNG)

[Teegedeck]

Originally posted by Ramirez
Done. Avisynth2.5.no filtering whatsoever.720x304res.588kbps-video.44kbps-audio.770megs total (20 Megs Oversized?)

Thanks for the good work! I'd love it if you could also test XviD unstable (how about '3 B-frames, ratio 150, offset 100; quarterpel; NO GMC!; NO lumi [Edit: on second thoughts, hm, perhaps I'd even use the old-lumi masking code (in uManiac's builds), on this one]; chroma motion; VHQ mode 4'). Only if you got nothing better to do...:D

I'm pretty sure, without inbuilt pre- and post-processing XviD will do a poor job, here, but anyway, I'm still curious!:)

[Sirber]

MPEG4 in general bellow average of 600kbps it need post-processing. RealVideo 9 don't need post-processing at any bitrate (don't do a DVD at 200kbps :p)

[Teegedeck]

Err, quoting Karl Lillevold:


quote:Originally posted by Sirber
The Media Player Classic with RV9 codec is doing a great job for playing RMVB. It has no post-processing, which makes the video less blurry.


I copied this from another thread, just to make sure this mis-understanding is cleared up:

There is no more post-processing in RealOne playing RV9 than in MPC playing RV9. MPC uses the exact same DLLs as RealOne, and the same decoding process takes place.

That said, we are looking into improvements in this area, and how to make it adjustable. The post processing in RV9 does not work like the post processing in ffdshow, and can not be separated from the decoding, or adjusted by itself without potentially affecting the video quality negatively. It can still be made adjustable, but it would be adjusted on the encoder side, with the setting transmitted in the bitstream.

It's built in. Always was. Cannot be de-activated. Pre- and postprocessing, probably. Last time I looked, it still was there. ;)

[^^-+I4004+-^^]

>It's built in. Always was. Cannot be de-activated. Pre- and postprocessing, probably. Last time I looked, it still was there

this is true,offcourse.........
THE BIG advantage of mpeg flavours ( divx,xvid or any format supported by ffdshow for that matter )
is enormous flexibility on playback ( & encoding ) : how will rv9's 2 settings
( saturation and sharpness ) on decoding beat ffdshow's
goodies ?

does rv9 process video?
hell,yes.....it blurs pretty hard ( lower the bitrate
harder it blurs )

does it have blocks?
hell,yes....only it's camouflages it better.......ie. it smooths
the borders between blocks so they are less visible
( so ,by the look of it,it smooths a)blocks
AND b)borders between the blocks )
sometimes (especially rv9) these blocks tend to flicker so they become
quite obvious.....

does it have mosquitos?
nope!
realvideo is said to use "fractal" encoding but even if
it used DCT the image smoothed this much will hardly
show any mosquitos...( as they (mosquitos) are a sign of toolowbitrate/sharpedges/
DCT coefficients rounded to zero by quantization.... )
is "block fractal"(?) better than "block DCT" system?
to say this one would need rv9 in zplayer+ffdshow
processing.......(will this ever happen?)
probably not,given the "cartoonish" look even to people's faces
that i experience on lores/lobitrate rv9 stuff.......


but also,heavy lo-bitrate/streaming optimizations mean that
on very low bitrates it will look better than mpeg's.....
it has LESS blocks,it has no mosquitos,sure it's smoothed more,but
humans prefer even that to heavy digital noise (blocks+mosquitos)
of mpeg's lo-bitrates....
and some of those audio compresors are pretty impressive....

so if you save space,go for that,if you don't want to save space go for something that ffdshow will decode...
[ and i really mean it,mpeg4 on 400kbit will look real lousy for the resolutions we're talking about...completely unusable for encoding of
analog-capture video source..... BUT ffdshow can fix that to some
extent.....with adding noise and sharpnening functions...]


and there's so much talk about rm going opensource in some ways,including support for coding avi's with rm9 as a compressor,but didn't saw it happening.......
if open-source scene could get rm source code i think decoder tweaks
might become true,but this way...nnaaaahhhhh


[ some of my "is it Real or is it UNReal" thoughts ]

cheers

Ivo

[Ramirez]

Originally posted by Teegedeck
Thanks for the good work! I'd love it if you could also test XviD unstable (how about '3 B-frames, ratio 150, offset 100; quarterpel; NO GMC!; NO lumi [Edit: on second thoughts, hm, perhaps I'd even use the old-lumi masking code (in uManiac's builds), on this one]; chroma motion; VHQ mode 4'). Only if you got nothing better to do...:D

Thx for the warm feedback :),no problem,(it's gonna take a while though)

[cult]

too bad for my taste.It looks like an ugly video from game back in 90's.I mean its a video that cant be watched.The 1st pic I can guess thats a close up of a face beacuse of the black holes for eyes and mouth...

[Sirber]

I'll try it with the lastest release from Koepi, with VHQ1, BF3@150, and with alt curve.

[Koepi]

I need to upload a newer build, the last unstable on my site has problems with a/v synch, you have to adjust the audio delay with it. This is due some internal changes in the core, it doesn't send these 0x7f-frames anymore, which made vdub drop padding frames. This is fixed in VfW of newer builds.
New build is up %)


Hm.

Regards
Koepi

[mf]

Muha, I did Gladiator on 1CD back in the days of Nandub! 640xsomething and the quality was pretty constant (EVEN the high motion stuff looked ok). The only nasty thing was the vorbis audio which at the time couldn't handle such low bitrates properly ;). Final size at 782MB, burned on 800MB cd-r media. Now if nandub could handle 2,5 hours that well, I trust XviD unstable can handle 3 hours just as well, probably better. And of course Vorbis has improved since too.

[Sirber]

I give up... AutoDub 1.7 bug on BeSweet and I'm too lazy for a manual job :)

[midiguy]

to make a correction, someone in this thread said that RV9 pre-processes the video? that is very very untrue! no pre-processing is done at all, however there is post-processing. the post-processing is not something that could be adjusted on the decoders side though (according to karl, it may only be adjusted when first encoding the file), and apprently, for hte next version of RV9, we will be able to change the post-processing levels (on the encoders side). Also, that jitter bug is suppose to be fixed by the next version too. oh, and for the person that encoded that movie with the low bitrate and very high res, I think the results probably would have been a lot better if you lowered the resolution. With a bitrate that low, you should probably go down to atleast 512 x XXX or maybe even lower.

[Ramirez]

Originally posted by midiguy
for the person that encoded that movie with the low bitrate and very high res, I think the results probably would have been a lot better if you lowered the resolution. With a bitrate that low, you should probably go down to atleast 512 x XXX or maybe even lower.

Hmm... I wonder who the hell was that person .:rolleyes:

[Sirber]

Me too... who is he?

[midiguy]

I think it was "Ramirez", whoever that is.