FairUse 2.6 is out

[UMP]

@Zhnujm : maybe at a later time

@RathO : we already discussed about this

@Wolfman : maybe you should give FU a deeper look ;)

FU's "indexing" copies the data to your HD before processing (I know that's not VOB output, and this is not likely to change), allows for 2 audio tracks, has AC3 audio support, and should produce AVI files that are 100% compatible with ESS-based standalone players (if not, please let me know).

Regards,

ump

[RathO]

@UMP: I didn't re-ask just for fun... you never say anything to my "bad 4:3 AR: 512x368 instead of 512x384" or my "do not mux expert option" except: -"that's the first time I hear about this, don't know what may have happened."

Whatever i guess?

Hum...

[UMP]

About bad 4/3 aspect ratio : don't crop at all, and you should get what you want I think.

EDIT :

About the feature requests :

I'm currently having hard times trying to implement a _fast_ HQ resize filter, trying to solve bugs that make FU hang during encoding, and so on. Adding an option to _not_ mux the final movie is not my current priority, but if you (don't know if you're a developer yourself) or anyone else implements the feature, I'll be happy to merge it to the official source code.

[Wolfman]

Ahh i didnt realise .. however I have merely experimented with some trailers and I think it only had ac3 2.0 sound...but I still like the control (and tweaking audio size vs videosize) that Autogk can do. Will check it out more thoroughly.

[therealjoeblow]

Originally posted by UMP


May I ask what does make you prefer AutoGK (len0x, no offense here ;)) ?

Regards,

ump


...no offense, ump, but with my (few) tests, in my opinion (we're all entitled, aren't we?) it's quality - AutoGK produces *significantly* better looking encodes at the same resulution and target file sizes. I did a copule of movies in XviD and DivX, and in all cases, the AutoGK encodes looked sharper with much less pixellation and with better color saturation. The FU encodes all looked somewhat blurrier, with more noise and more washed out colors (less vibrant).

[Wolfman]

I agree with realjoeblow (on very limited testing).:rolleyes:
too wimpy too say it

[halbacht]

I did a copule of movies in XviD and DivX, and in all cases, the AutoGK encodes looked sharper with much less pixellation and with better color saturation.

What does it mean now? I think, if you are using no postprocessing (filters), then the quality is (when we neglect resizing which I anyhow don't need) up to the tuning of XVID/DIVX settings (and maybe up to the version), and you are free to adjust them as you want.

So it should be not up to the FU ore AGK, or I am wrong?

[UMP]

The point is AutoGK uses AviSynth with a bicubic or Lanczos resize filter and maybe luma correction, while FU currently uses internal routines and a simple bilinear resizer, which gives better compressibility, but produces a somewhat blurred picture.

I'm currently working on implementing a better resizer, but I'm not an assembly/MMX expert, so this might take some time.

Anyway, thank you for the honest answers, that's all I was asking for :)

Regards,

ump

[halbacht]

@UMP:
Let's put it this way:

It is undoubtedly a drawback but it can be seen also as an additional argument for an 'no resize' option I am advocating for, as a 'killer' feature for a whole class of equipment and users waiting for anamorphic output (no fear I have no intention to start the discussion again :thanks: ).

regards,
halbacht

[UMP]

Hello everyone, after reading your remarks, I had to take some drastic measures to correct the output quality of FU. The next release will have two resizing modes :

A better bilinear resize (for 1 CD backups)
A Lanczos resizer (IMHO, this one should be reserved to 2 CD backups)

I took some screenshots from an anime. Should do the same with a movie, but I fear I'm too lazy :)

1. My reference picture (Lanczos resize, no further processing) :
http://fairuse.free.fr/images/ken/ken-nolimiter.jpg

2. the same with TV scale colors correction :
http://fairuse.free.fr/images/ken/ken-limiter.jpg

3. the first with an additional Undot filter :
http://fairuse.free.fr/images/ken/ken-undot.jpg

4. for comparing purpose, the previous FU resizer version :
http://fairuse.free.fr/images/ken/ken-oldresizer.jpg

I'd like to have some opinions about these. I don't know if the next FU release should do Undot, I don't find much difference between 1 and 3.

Regards,

ump

@halbacht :
With the upcoming release, if you don't crop the picture and choose the original DVD resolution you'll have your 'killer' feature. :)

[halbacht]

@UMP:
Very encouraging announcement, let's wait and see. Once it works, I am probably about to write an article (maybe even some kind of guide) about the differences in rips targeting TV sets and PC screens.

regards,
halbacht

[UMP]

FU 0.41 is out. Any feedback is welcome :)

Best regards,

ump

[halbacht]

After two days spent in Bristol without access to Internet, here I am with first FU 0.41 tests. This time I am focusing only on support for TV output. Let's start with good news.

A really GREAT one is that FU in version 0.41 has integrated extended explicit support for standalone DVD players! You can choose whether you want to rip in TV display mode (it means 4:3 with PAL PAR, I suppose) and additionally you can choose anamorphic 16:9 mode! Finally!!! These settings influence the choice of resolutions offered for final video size where you now get everything you need for perfect TV rip!

And now back to reality. Although strategic design decisions are excellently made, the implementation is still on the half of the way. Let's see why.

I've made all my tests with 1.16 sec long anamorphic clip made in 2.35:1 DAR. I used two pass XVID (target file size 10 MByte, I experimented with both H.232 and MPEG quantization, VHQ mode 1 to 4, no BFrames, no GMC, no Quarter pixel, PAR square-default), including 128KB audio encoding. All tests are made for TV display mode, anamorphic support, and extra high quality mode (I don't know exectly what does it mean but I suppose its about new resizing technique). Although I've made several tests and I will I will summerize only most important ones:

1. I choosed no cropping at all, it means 720x576 with black bars included! I also choose the same final video size (720x576). This should be the default case in ripping for TV sets (theoretically XVID should encode only the payload and spend a very little space to encode horizontal black bars). In practice the speed of both encoding step is identical (no resizing!) and on my PC it's about 60 Fps. Fantastic!

But there is a bug in this mode and produced file size is only about 1 MByte in size (although the file x.raw.1.fud is about 60 MByte!). When you play it you see only green surfice and hear encoded tone.

2. The same as previous, BUT with minimal resizing to 704x560. In this case everything is almost perfect, but the speed of the second pass is reduced to 10-20 Fps due to (theoretically unnecessary)resizing. But in this case we get a VALID ANAMORPHIC AVI which looks (almost) GREAT on my 16:9 TV set when played from a standalone MPEG4 DVD player! Much, much better then before!!! But I say almost, because luma correction is still mising, and a picture on TV set looks a little bit darker then on PC screen. And as an advice, because in this case resizing is really minimal (720x576 => 704x560) it is probably wiser to use cropping and not resizing, it will save a lot of time with a minimal loss of visual information.

But here are some other problems as well, I think with XVId (hopefully not hej-hej version) or it is something with my settings. Final file size was about 60 MB and not 10 MB as I wanted!

Let' summerize and go to sleep. With version 0.41 FU made really big step towards acquiring a whole new class of users. Bugs are also here but I am confident they will be solved soon. I am also going to do more testing but I think this first run has already shown the most striking problems in this release.

regards,
halbacht

[Wolfman]

I use hiquality mode xvid tv-aspect ratio.
seems to work ok so far. Limited testing.
Tooltips would be nice. Could show options chosen while encoding.
Ability to give a meaningful name to the output file.
----------comment deleted-------re xvid-----
16:9 mode is always grayed out??
Cant see the option to use AC3 sound?? whhoops (not obvious**)
Ability to use AC3 sound but downsize it eg 5.1 to 2.0 or 192 to 128
Could remember last filesize set and use that as new default instead of 700mb each time or use a bitrate of 1200kbps and set the filsize on that.
Option to delete all temp files incl fud's

This should be the default case in ripping for TV sets
I dont understand this? why?

[UMP]

Luma correction (same as AviSynth's 'Limiter' filter) is applied when encoding in "TV mode". You can check this by encoding the same clip with and without TV mode. The green picture issue is fixed.

16:9 mode is always grayed out
Enable the expert mode

[Zhnujm]

@halbacht:
You should take into account that theres only a difference between TV and PC playback if you use an ESS based standalone.
Other play PC resolutions just fine, no need for "Use TV Display Mode"
In fact, if you use this setting you will get a wrong aspect ratio with these players.

@UMP:
It seems to me FairUse uses the "ITU-R blablabla" standard for resizing, is there a way to disable it like in Gknot ?

[UMP]

Originally posted by Zhnujm
@halbacht:
You should take into account that theres only a difference between TV and PC playback if you use an ESS based standalone.
Other play PC resolutions just fine, no need for "Use TV Display Mode"
In fact, if you use this setting you will get a wrong aspect ratio with these players.
halbacht is talking about anamorphic encodings, which allow to keep full vertical resolution from the DVD.

@UMP:
It seems to me FairUse uses the "ITU-R blablabla" standard for resizing, is there a way to disable it like in Gknot ?
FU can use the ITU-R blablabla standard for resizing. To disable it, all you have to do is to use the so-called TV mode ;) (ITU-R ... is only needed to correct AR on PC monitors).

[Zhnujm]

Originally posted by UMP
halbacht is talking about anamorphic encodings, which allow to keep full vertical resolution from the DVD.


Yes, i know. But for playback with Sigma/Mediatek players you have disable "TV Mode" and enable "anamorphic" for correct (anamorphic) playback.


Originally posted by UMP
FU can use the ITU-R blablabla standard for resizing. To disable it, all you have to do is to use the so-called TV mode ;) (ITU-R ... is only needed to correct AR on PC monitors).

No, that does not do the same as disabling ITU-R in Gknot, the picture is more vertical stretched with FairUse.
I think Gknot creates exact 4:3 resolutions if ITU-R is deselected, thats what i meant.

example:
FairUse (TV-Mode) -> 704x432 or 640x512
FairUse ->704x384 or 640x464

Gknot without ITU -> 704x400 or 640x480
Gknot with ITU -> 704x384 or 640x464

[Wolfman]

16:9 mode is always grayed out?? When FU detects the source as 4/3 even tho it is really 16:9 (it needs the black bars cropped top and bottom) then 16:9 cannot be used.. Not really sure what it does anyway..as fully cropped output is 16:9.(ish)
The source is a trailer disc

[halbacht]

@UMP, first tests of 0.41a:

Man, you've made it! Green screen probleme is solved, I use 720x576 (no resizing at all) file size is now really 10 MB and not 60 MB (what was it?), no loss of vertical resolution (the same as original movie) and the quality is p-e-r-f-e-c-t! I think the darker picture on TV is possibly due to the better colour saturation on my TV set then on my humble monitor, I have to check it. I continue with tests, I will pick up different sources and do one whole movie.

Congratulations from my side.
P.S. Although I hoped that the speed of the second step will be the same, it has dropped from 60 fps to ~20 fps. But it's not really an issue for me.

@Zhnujm:

I just want to understand what's happening in your case. I suppose you have 16:9 TV set, right? In the preferences menu of my ESS player I can choose 'WIDESCREEN', NORMAL/PS (I think it stays for 'pan and scan', haven't checked it yet) and NORMAL/LB. I think similar choices are available on all standalone players, while the producer cannot know which kind of TV set will be attached to a player, it has to support both. Now if you have 16:9 set and you use something analog to my WIDESCREEN settings, I wonder why you should not have perfect picture when you use anamorhic feature of 0.41a (of course if a DVD is a anamorhic one)! BUT, even if you have 16:9 TV set and you didn't changed your Sigma standalone settings (they are per default 4:3), its normal that you will have 'distorted' picture if you use anamorhic option in FU 0.41a. Its also quite normal that anamorhic movie will be distorted on all 4:3 TV sets. Can you please let me know about this.

@Wolfman:

If a source is declared as 4:3 (even although the real 'payload' is 16:9), the loss of vertical resolution has alreday happened during the preparation process for a DVD. It makes no sense to support anamorhic option here because it is (extremely) useful only in order to preserve the maximal quality of anamorphic sources. As 4:3 source is not anamorhic, the option should stay gray.

regards,
halbacht

[Zhnujm]

I think the point is that these players expect pc-like square pixel resolutions.
For example, you have to deselect "TV-Mode" (anamorphic or not) to get the right aspect ratio, with my ESS based player i have to switch it on.
Here is an example what happens if you use 720x576 (without cropping) with these players: ftp://zhnujm.dyndns.org/aspectjpg.jpg
Top is the original DVD, then 720x576 AVI and bottom 720x528 AVI.
You will get black borders left+right, same happens if you play such a file with a pc.

If you are interested in the output of different players you can look here: ftp://zhnujm.dyndns.org/aspect/player
These are captures from some resolutions to show the difference between the players.

But to stay a bit on topic :D, the anamorphic resize of FairUse works quite good for me, i was searching for such a feature.

[halbacht]

@Zhnujm:
Here is an example what happens if you use 720x576 (without cropping) with these players: ftp://zhnujm.dyndns.org/aspectjpg.jpg
Top is the original DVD, then 720x576 AVI and bottom 720x528 AVI.
You will get black borders left+right, same happens if you play such a file with a pc. I looked at JPGs at your page, and I just wandering about (at least) one thing: If a Medion (Sigma) player introduces horizontal and black bars around the JPEG in 720x576 format (middle picture), what happens when you are looking a DVD in the same (720x576) resolution? I mean do you still see these black bars or not? If not, then a player interpretes JPEGs (and probably AVIs) quite different then MPEG2 material. I haven't got a clue why and what's really happening...

[Wolfman]

A good option would be the ability to specify the output name, also the program to check if the output file already exists ..and if so add a suffix letter then output the file. This would enable the job processing to work in a more intuitive way.

you know why i want this :mad: (many files overwritten)

[Zhnujm]

@halbacht:
Major misunderstandig i think :)
The pictures are screenshots from "running" DVD-Video/AVI files.
So the top picture is taken during playback of the original dvd, the other during playback of the avi files.
I captured the s-video out of the player (elta with Mediatek) with my PC.

[halbacht]

@Zhnujm:

OK, it’s clear now. But my question is still here:

What happens when you are looking a MPEG2 DVD in the same (720x576) resolution? I mean do you still see black bars or not? If not, then ELTA player interprets information about MPEG4 AVI resolution quite different then MPEG2 resolution. For me it is not reasonable :confused: , but it seems that's the way it is with these players...

@All:

Few words about aspect ratio 'settings' in XVID options. Although there is a thread here concerning this topic, I think there are still a lot of uncertainty how to use it and what you can achieve using it, that's why I want to say a few words in hope to make it more clear.

AFAIK, aspect ratio settings in XVID 1.x are --ONLY-- about writing AR information which you have selected in this XVID option tab into the container file header, so that during a playback the (software or hardware) player can (eventually) use this information to produce correctly (on-the-fly) resized picture. On that way you can inform the player to interpret anamorhic material correctly. But this is, again, only then useful, if you have made NO RESIZING after (XVID) compressing, as it is now possible with FU 0.41a (probably soon 0.42 with XVID 1.0 RC4).

This XVID feature has --NOTHING TO DO-- with the way how XVID uses this information internally, in a matter of fact it -- DOESN'T USE IT AT ALL--! You will get ALWAYS the same XVID output, doesn't matter what you choose for aspect ratio (because XVID does not resize the coded material). This is not clearly indicated in XVID documentation, and can lead to misunderstanding and wrong expectations, so I think it is good to say it this way.

regards,
halbacht

[UMP]

Originally posted by Wolfman
A good option would be the ability to specify the output name, also the program to check if the output file already exists ..and if so add a suffix letter then output the file. This would enable the job processing to work in a more intuitive way.

you know why i want this :mad: (many files overwritten)
You shold enable the "generate unique filenames" option.

[Wolfman]

Well the unique names are not to my taste. session1 blugh :eek: but I suppose its a minor detail.
halbacht.. are you saying the output from fairuse is always the same regardless of the tv aspect setting and that just sets a flag in the avi header information which is then read by the standalone player to resize in a slightly different way... or am i completely wrong..

[Zhnujm]

Originally posted by halbacht
What happens when you are looking a MPEG2 DVD in the same (720x576) resolution? I mean do you still see black bars or not? If not, then ELTA player interprets information about MPEG4 AVI resolution quite different then MPEG2 resolution. For me it is not reasonable :confused: , but it seems that's the way it is with these players...


Yes its different for AVI and MPEG-2, otherwise you wont have a correct display for all "normal" encoded AVI files and you would have to use a setting like "TV Display Mode" to get a correct playback.
AVI files are always 4:3 and so should it be handled by the player.

@Wolfman:
The TV Mode setting in FaiUse really changes the Video Size, the aspect ratio settings in Xvid do not.
Unfortunatly no hardware player makes use of these settings.

[nightrhyme]

Thanx for this fine software. I'm testing it out and i don't seem to be able to avoid BLACK BARS when Encoding 16:9 movies.
Hope you can help me.

Thanx in advance.

Off topic. What is the name of the Flash software used for the tutorial on your website ?

This is the settings used:
*IMAGE REMOVED*

*IMAGE REMOVED*

And the result:
*IMAGE REMOVED*

Should look like this:
*IMAGE REMOVED*

[UMP]

Originally posted by nightrhyme
[B]Thanx for this fine software. I'm testing it out and i don't seem to be able to avoid BLACK BARS when Encoding 16:9 movies.
Hope you can help me.
Maybe are you requesting for Pan & Scan ? Is so, you should crop from the left and right of the picture.

Off topic. What is the name of the Flash software used for the tutorial on your website ?
The software used is ScreenFlash Pro (http://unflash.com/)

[nightrhyme]

Originally posted by UMP
Maybe are you requesting for Pan & Scan ? Is so, you should crop from the left and right of the picture.


The software used is ScreenFlash Pro (http://unflash.com/)

Thanx for reply and link to flash proggy :-)

I don't quite understand the pan scan thing. I just want the BLACK BARS at the top and bottom cropped away like I illustrated with this screen shot, The bars marked with red.

*IMAGE REMOVED*



I don't understand how cropping from the left and right would remove the BLACK BARS ?

What is the intention of the CROP function if not to remove the BLACK BARS ?

Thanx in advance

[UMP]

I fear I don't understand how you expect this 16/9 picture to be displayed on a (more or less) 4/3 computer screen without the black bars ? Could you please add the expected screen edges on your screenshot, or do you have a 16/9 TV set ?

[nightrhyme]

Again thanx for taking the time to answer me :-)

Of course the black bars will be present anyway on a 4/3 TV/Monitor.
I just don't want to waste any bits on BLACK BARS while encoding.

MPC will add the black bars but i don't want them in the rip.

I guess that's not possible with FairUse ?
If not. Them I'm very curious to know what the cropping option is for then ?

I also would like to add that FairUse is the first AUTOEncoding Tool I have found that truly Utilizes the Hyper Threading feature on Pentium processors.

Thanx in advance

[UMP]

The black bars are _not_ included in the rip if you use the cropping feature. You can see this with MPC in windowed mode by setting the zoom to 100% ;)

[nightrhyme]

Originally posted by UMP
The black bars are _not_ included in the rip if you use the cropping feature. You can see this with MPC in windowed mode by setting the zoom to 100% ;)

Sounds good :)
I guess I just have to find out how to make this work.
I posted screen shots of all settings used in the rip.
All screenshots are from MPC with 100% zoom.
You can see that I cropped and Chose the resolution 672 x 288 but I end up with a rip with the resolution 672 x 504
So I get (504-288) worth of black bars.
What am I doing wrong :confused:

Again thanx

Settings:
*IMAGE REMOVED*

End result 672 x 504:
*IMAGE REMOVED*

[UMP]

Please open your movie with GSpot and see the reported resolution.

[nightrhyme]

:eek: I'm soooo sorry. You are absolutely right. Gspot reports the the correct resolution 672 x 288.

Somehow MPC just refuses to display actual resolution. Must have messed with some settings.
Don't I feel foolish (º¿º)

I apologize from the bottom of my heart for all the trouble :rolleyes:

So all that's left to say is: Thank you for continuing development of this very fine software ;)

[Wolfman]

Thats you in the picture Nightrhyme :D

[nightrhyme]

Originally posted by Wolfman
Thats you in the picture Nightrhyme :D

Yeah :(
Will let the screenshots stay for a couple of days to show my stupidity :(

[UMP]

http://fairuse.free.fr/images/private/lol.gif

Don't worry, that's fine :D

[Wolfman]

New question.. will fairuse be able to back up my Svcd's or Vcds.. or in the future will it be able to convert mpeg2 Tv episodes captured from TV??

Also the audio on some encodes is still way too low ..even with audio boost.. is there any way of boosting audio even further.

Just read about Ring protection.. any thoughts

[Wilbert]

http://fairuse.free.fr/lang_en/download_allopass.html

What the hell? This is not very nice of you, since you used fu2k's code to build on.

(Btw, I saw that the license is QPL, not that it matters though.) Maybe someone can compile the source code (0.42), which can be found here

http://fairuse.free.fr/lang_en/index.html

[Video Dude]

Wilbert, it seems 0.42a is offered for free once again. No more $2 fee.

[spectra]

i found some muxing problems in 0.42b. if i let fu create the cbr-mp3 file and let fu mux it to avi or mkv it gets a little out of sync at the end (videofile=22:05min ac3=22:05min mp3=22:06). but if i mux the fu-created files on my own with the vdubmod delivered in the fu-package, it is perfectly sync. i didn't try a long movie so far. can someone acknowledge this ??

[UMP]

Originally posted by spectra
i found some muxing problems in 0.42b. if i let fu create the cbr-mp3 file and let fu mux it to avi or mkv it gets a little out of sync at the end (videofile=22:05min ac3=22:05min mp3=22:06). but if i mux the fu-created files on my own with the vdubmod delivered in the fu-package, it is perfectly sync. i didn't try a long movie so far. can someone acknowledge this ??
I can. :D
This issue is solved by FU 0.42c.

[lakedude]

42c? All I can find is 41????

[promitheas]

Hey UMP
if i understood well, are you the author of fairuse?
Cause i have a suggestion to make and i can see no e-mail address in your page.

[spectra]

Originally posted by UMP
I can. :D
This issue is solved by FU 0.42c.

thanks for the quick reponse and hopefully the 0.42c is out soon.

[buzzqw]

Allopass again :eek:

UMP what's happening ? :confused:

Thanks anyway for your effort and time ! :)

BHH

[Wilbert]

The source of 0.43b is available. I will try to compile it this weekend (unless someone beats me).

http://fairuse.free.fr/lang_en/index.html

changelist:

http://fairuse.free.fr/lang_en/history.html