Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Capturing and Editing Video > Avisynth Development

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 1st July 2017, 22:09   #3501  |  Link
mkver
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 182
Are you telling me I should use MaskTools instead of Levels (I have already thought about it, but I wanted to know whether this is a bug in Levels or not first)? Or are you thinking that Levels is part of MaskTools?
Anyway, thanks for answering.
mkver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd July 2017, 00:11   #3502  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,170
Sorry I didn't read correctly and mixed things up when you mentioned LUT. Forget what I said. I'll leave Pinterf answer.

If it uses a LUT table, however, it's likely it might use a similar logic.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd July 2017, 00:50   #3503  |  Link
TheFluff
Excessively jovial fellow
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: rude
Posts: 1,071
Levels always uses a LUT currently. There's a comment in the code that says runtime evaluation is todo for 32-bit float input.

The reason it eats so much memory with dithering enabled is that enabling dithering multiplies the LUT size by 256; see line 179 and the subsequent allocation on line 195.
TheFluff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd July 2017, 07:57   #3504  |  Link
mkver
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 182
Thanks for pointing to the source. And what's the logic that makes a 10bit LUT use the same memory as a 16bit LUT? Is it because of the "garbage" mentioned here? (Garbage means that the most significant bits aren't necessarily zero, although they should be, or?)
And because IsYUV is true for Y8-Y16, line 193 and line 203 imply that a chroma LUT is created for monochrome formats.
mkver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2017, 13:21   #3505  |  Link
tebasuna51
Moderator
 
tebasuna51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,611
I found a difference between Avs+ and AviSynth 2.60 behaviour.

This script with Avs+:

Code:
WavSource("16-bit-int.wav")
SSRC(44100)
don't work with Avs+ and show a error: Input audio sample format to SSRC must be float.

Work fine with AviSynth 2.60 and output a Float wav like be expected by documentation :

"Audio is always converted to Float."

Please, instead show the error, do the conversion automatically.
__________________
BeHappy, AviSynth audio transcoder, in Doom9 forums. NicAudio, BassAudio, audio decoders.
tebasuna51 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2017, 19:10   #3506  |  Link
qyot27
...?
 
qyot27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by tebasuna51 View Post
I found a difference between Avs+ and AviSynth 2.60 behaviour.

This script with Avs+:

Code:
WavSource("16-bit-int.wav")
SSRC(44100)
don't work with Avs+ and show a error: Input audio sample format to SSRC must be float.

Work fine with AviSynth 2.60 and output a Float wav like be expected by documentation :

"Audio is always converted to Float."

Please, instead show the error, do the conversion automatically.
That change was done deliberately, and is a long-acknowledged difference in behavior, because it was a conscious choice to enforce that AviSynth+ won't do implicit conversions between formats. Erroring out here isn't any different from other errors regarding filters not supporting X pixel format for video. You have to use ConvertTo there if you try giving a filter the wrong format, if you have int audio and want to give it to SSRC, then use ConvertAudioToFloat on it first. Either that, or the SSRC filter itself should be extended to actually support int audio input.

This should instead be mentioned in the AviSynth+ page on the wiki, since you can't expect other AviSynth+ changes to be true for 2.6's doc entries either, save for Plus revisions to be explicitly noted (there are some places it is, right?). I thought the 'no implicit conversions' decision was mentioned on the AviSynth+ page at some point, but may have gotten lost in the updates and that page getting split up.
qyot27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2017, 20:24   #3507  |  Link
tebasuna51
Moderator
 
tebasuna51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,611
I can't understand for what introduce unnecesary differences with the standard Avisynth behavior.

Is only a way to obtain bug reports, like mine.

I think I read all Avs+ docs and don't see nothing about it.
__________________
BeHappy, AviSynth audio transcoder, in Doom9 forums. NicAudio, BassAudio, audio decoders.
tebasuna51 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2017, 20:57   #3508  |  Link
manolito
Registered User
 
manolito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 2,608
I totally agree with tebasuna. The "+" in AVS+ stands for "Everything which standard AVS has, and then plus a lot of other things". At least this is how it should be.

Breaking backward compatibility is a BAD thing, and it's even worse if it is not a bug, but a deliberate design decision. Even if you think that the standard AVS design is wrong, you cannot just change it because of the huge installed standard AVS user base. If you want to change the design then do something completely different like VapourSynth.


Cheers
manolito

Last edited by manolito; 3rd July 2017 at 22:53.
manolito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2017, 21:01   #3509  |  Link
Sharc
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,490
Agree, +1
Sharc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2017, 23:58   #3510  |  Link
TheFluff
Excessively jovial fellow
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: rude
Posts: 1,071
If you want bug-for-bug compatibility with Avisynth 2.5.8 until the heat death of the universe, then maybe what you want to use is... Avisynth 2.5.8? But then again, adding an explicit ConvertToFloat call is hardly back-breaking labor for any of you, now is it? In fact, I'd wager it's less work than downgrading to 2.5.8. I mean, yeah, it should be documented that it doesn't implicitly convert anymore, but the presence of implicit conversions has a far greater potential for Surprise and Confusion than removing them does. Yes I know you're used to the old behavior but that doesn't mean it's any less confusing for new users.

Quote:
Originally Posted by manolito View Post
I totally agree with tebasuna. The "+" in AVS+ stands for "Everything which standard AVS has, and then plus a lot of other things". At least this is how it should be.

Breaking backward compatibility is a BAD thing, and it's even worse if it is not a bug, but a deliberate design decision. Even if you think that the standard AVS design is wrong, you cannot just change it because of the huge installed standard AVS user base. If you want to change the design then do something completely different like VapourSynth.
If people actually consistently applied this logic then Avs+ would never have happened, because like it or not it is a substantial design departure from OG Avisynth in many respects. It maintains a user interface that is mostly similar, but even that is not the same.

Either way though, "once you've got a design that a lot of people use you can't ever change it" is a fundamentally brain damaged position to take in software design.

Last edited by TheFluff; 4th July 2017 at 00:07.
TheFluff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th July 2017, 11:36   #3511  |  Link
stax76
Registered User
 
stax76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,757
There is always something between black and white..., like a option both on system and file level.
stax76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th July 2017, 12:19   #3512  |  Link
vcmohan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: India
Posts: 733
To satisfy both, may be, have a separate section in doom9 forum like vapoursynth has.
__________________
mohan
my plugins are now hosted here
vcmohan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th July 2017, 13:20   #3513  |  Link
Motenai Yoda
Registered User
 
Motenai Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 701
iirc the strict check about variables type was introduced with 2.6 vanilla branch
__________________
powered by Google Translator
Motenai Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th July 2017, 14:18   #3514  |  Link
raffriff42
Retried Guesser
 
raffriff42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by qyot27 View Post
That change was done deliberately, and is a long-acknowledged difference in behavior, because it was a conscious choice to enforce that AviSynth+ won't do implicit conversions between formats. Erroring out here isn't any different from other errors regarding filters not supporting X pixel format for video.
Makes sense to me. If the conversion must be made, do so explicitly.
raffriff42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th July 2017, 14:55   #3515  |  Link
LigH
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
 
LigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 5,929
An explicit conversion may be necessary for newer AviSynth versions; but at least it doesn't break compatibility to older versions.
__________________

New German Gleitz board
MediaFire: x264 | x265 | VPx | AOM | Xvid
LigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th July 2017, 19:30   #3516  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by LigH View Post
An explicit conversion may be necessary for newer AviSynth versions; but at least it doesn't break compatibility to older versions.
If you have an old script that was doing an implicit conversion, it will break.

Same as here.

I see no difference.

In both cases you need to do explicit conversion.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th July 2017, 21:06   #3517  |  Link
LigH
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
 
LigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 5,929
I just meant, you don't need explicit for one version and implicit for the other; only explicit for all. Be a good example, be verbose. Sorry, I started learning serious programming with Pascal, I am used to be a bit more explicit, due to the stricter type checks. At least I don't rate a small one-line addition as desaster. Incompatibilities between PHP versions 4.x, 5.2, 5.4 and 5.6 are a lot worse (e.g. HTML entity conversion functions silently returning an empty string when one character is in the wrong character set, instead of throwing an error, which you can avoid by explicitly stating the character set, which is incompatible to earlier PHP versions not knowing this parameter).
__________________

New German Gleitz board
MediaFire: x264 | x265 | VPx | AOM | Xvid
LigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th July 2017, 00:43   #3518  |  Link
manolito
Registered User
 
manolito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 2,608
Sorry I do not understand this whole fuss about explicit converttoflow or do it automatically..

SSRC is a filter which is integrated into AviSynth, but which is basically separate code which is not related to AviSynth. SSRC happens to require float input. If the input is not float then it must be converted to float somehow, I don't care if Avisynth does the conversion or if SSRC does it. Since the user obviously wants SSRC, it is safe to assume that he just forgot to do the conversion explicitly. Instead of throwing an error (which is the equivalent of telling the user that he is stupid), why can't SSRC (or AviSynth) do this conversion automatically? It has worked this way for many years, nothing about it is confusing, it just makes my life easier AND IT WORKS! The most important principle for software development is to make it easy to get working results, not to teach the developer about correct programming habits.

If Fluffy calls this a "brain damaged approach", I couldn't care less. He can apply his principles when he does Bible studies, there is no room for such principles in the real word.


Cheers
manolito
manolito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th July 2017, 03:46   #3519  |  Link
StainlessS
HeartlessS Usurer
 
StainlessS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Over the rainbow
Posts: 7,086
Quote:
it is safe to assume that he just forgot to do the conversion explicitly
Yep, dont matter whether intentional or otherwise, the output IS gonna be Float (assuming it succeeds) so throwing error if input
not of type float is just a nuisance and of zero benefit at all, but will for sure break some scripts.

EDIT: I cannot think of any positive result coming from being pernickety here.
__________________
I sometimes post sober.
StainlessS@MediaFire ::: AND/OR ::: StainlessS@SendSpace

"Some infinities are bigger than other infinities", but how many of them are infinitely bigger ???

Last edited by StainlessS; 5th July 2017 at 03:57.
StainlessS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th July 2017, 09:04   #3520  |  Link
raffriff42
Retried Guesser
 
raffriff42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by StainlessS View Post
Yep, dont matter whether intentional or otherwise, the output IS gonna be Float (assuming it succeeds) so throwing error if input not of type float is just a nuisance
This would prevent SSRC (or TimeStretch) from supporting any new audio format in the future -- like SuperEQ does, which now accepts 16-bit in addition to Float. To make that happen, auto-convert had to go.

EDIT correction, SuperEQ does not accept 16-bit.

Last edited by raffriff42; 6th July 2017 at 13:35.
raffriff42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:52.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.