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 > Video Encoding > MPEG-4 ASP

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 7th February 2007, 13:53   #61  |  Link
Sharro
Xvid Tribalistic Fan
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Portugal
Posts: 270
Hi all,

I would like to have some feedback from the creators of the presets if this discussion of matrices and standalones should be taken into consideration here or not as I don't like to post off-topic matters and it could end in an endless loop for the presets.

@G_M_C: You better test with a small clip, I have a Philips DVP720SA (Mediatek1389EE) and a Philips5960/12 (still haven't found the Mediatek Chip Version).

The 5960 play's didees6of9 well but the DVP720 doesn't, also Yamada 6800 (1389DE) plays both well. I believe it has to do more with the ARM used in the firmware than a capability of the chip itself.

I don't want to test any more matrices otherwise my brain will be all messed up, HeadBanger can you find a way to send me a FOX matrix sample that I can test on both my players ?

All the best,

Sharro

Last edited by Sharro; 7th February 2007 at 13:56.
Sharro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th February 2007, 22:56   #62  |  Link
Teegedeck
Moderator, Ex(viD)-Mascot
 
Teegedeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,564
Hi Sharro,

I updated post 1 of this thread to explain why I don't think this thread is the right place for that, and also answered your PM to explain it in a bit of a lengthier fashion.

To summ it up: I'd prefer to keep it clearly separated; this thread is about purely quality-oriented presets, standalone-compatible presets (which are a legitimate and good idea) could be discussed in a separate thread or in the avs2qxvid.bat-thread because this batchfile already does something very much like what you asked for.
__________________
It's a man's life in Doom9's 52nd MPEG division.
"The cat sat on the mat."
ATM I'm thoroughly enjoying the Banshee - a fantastic music player/ripper for Linux. Give it a whirl!
Teegedeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2007, 10:26   #63  |  Link
professor_desty_nova
Registered User
 
professor_desty_nova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 55
Hi Teegedeck,

In the first post you say "1st pass @ quant=xy means that you have to set that quantizer as a zone in the first pass", but I only see it in the Anime preset (in the older thread they appeared in all presets). Am I blind, or the first pass quantizer zone settings aren't needed anymore?
professor_desty_nova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2007, 17:31   #64  |  Link
HeadBangeR77
Registered User
 
HeadBangeR77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heidelberg (DE), Kraków (PL)
Posts: 519
"First pass settings:
Same CQM as in second pass; same number of max consecutive b-frames, b-frame ratio and b-frame offset as in second pass; AQ if used in second pass; Trellis; ME precision=5, (except for the 'DVD-R perfect' preset, where it should be '4'); VHQ=1; Turbo. A zone with constant quantizer as specified in the preset-settings.
And that's it; no QPel, no GMC, no VHQ for-b-frames, no chroma ME."


Just above the main 2nd pass settings - I guess you were writing about this part.
So the same quantizer as used in the pre-set of your choice as the minimum value (usually Q3). Without a zone we would run a fast first pass, while the goal here is to run a mixed/hybrid 1st pass, sth between the fast one and the full quality one. It should work faster than the full quality option and ensure proper gathering of statistics, much more accurate than a fast first pass.

cheers,
HDBR77

PS. I've just reread the main post, and the way it's written it might sound confusing.
__________________
"Only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

Last edited by HeadBangeR77; 17th February 2007 at 13:51.
HeadBangeR77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th April 2007, 15:48   #65  |  Link
ronnylov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Borås, Sweden
Posts: 492
I wonder about the compressibility check. I was trying to use Enc to do a compressibility test but the program minimized and disappeared when starting the test (I had to stop the process in the task manager because there still was some disc activity going on). Maybe this is how it is supposed to be? Or maybe it did not like my avisynth script.

So I want to do a manually made compressibility check. What is the idea? Make a shorter sample of the original (like selectrangeevery in avisynth) and make a "full quality constant quant encode". The percentage value is that the target size compared to the size of the "full quality encode"?
Of course the target size is decreased to the same level as the original length was reduced (I mean if I encode 5 % of original video length to check compressibility, then full file size at "full quality" would be approximately 20 times higher).

Then I guess that by using 6 of 9 matrice and q=3 you get "full quality". Then choose the preset according to how much smaller in file size I want to make the final encode?

An example:
A sample of 5 % of the full video length gives a "full quality size" of 100 MB. My target file size is 1000 MB, and 5 % of 1000 MB is 50 MB. Then the compressibility check give 50 % compressibility because I need to compress my target to 50% of the full quality file size?

I have seen explanations like "target size compared to original size" but before encoding there is no real original size, just a bunch of uncompressed video frames that may have been originated from a original file with another level of compression...
__________________
Ronny
ronnylov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2007, 12:26   #66  |  Link
henryho_hk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 889
I suggest you trying Virtualdub with Enc (as I could not get it work with avs2avi). Actually, it is quite difficult to do manual "sampled" compressibility test because you need to sum up the individual frame sizes, discarding the extra I-frames (scene changes introduced by SelectRangeEvery) and its related b/p-frames. If Enc refuses to work, you can also try my batch script for Teegedeck's comptest.

Your example is correct. Compressibility test result is calculated with respect to source material, selected encoding parameters and a target size. In another sense, it is how "realistic" your target size is. Teegedeck's comp-test parameters serve as a well-defined, objective and consistent evaluation of the source material with respect to the target size. From the results, we can choose the appropriate encoding presets with predictable results (sharpness, details, etc). IMO, this is far better than the common "encode" - "blocky/undersized" - "complain" approaches.
henryho_hk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2007, 14:37   #67  |  Link
ronnylov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Borås, Sweden
Posts: 492
Thank you henryho_hk for the explanation. I tried latest VirtualDubMod with Enc and also VirtualDub (not sure if it was latest version) with Enc but I had the same problem. It was an avisynth script with HDTV in 720P I tried.

EDIT: Moved question regarding the batch script to it's own forum thread.
__________________
Ronny

Last edited by ronnylov; 24th April 2007 at 14:22.
ronnylov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st May 2007, 00:12   #68  |  Link
naylor83
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1
Does anyone know how to get the compression test settings to stick in Gordian Knot?

It will remember the settings for First Pass and Second Pass, but for each video I want to compress I have to edit the Xvid settings for the compressibility test. Slightly annoying.
naylor83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th June 2007, 17:09   #69  |  Link
fight2win
What's in a name dude !
 
fight2win's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 331
where to get latest build of xvid encoder to be used with vdub/enc?
fight2win is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th June 2007, 18:05   #70  |  Link
bur
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 103
You're registered for one and a half years and still don't know where to get Xvid builds?

And while this isn't the proper thread for these questions, try koepi.org.
bur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2007, 18:02   #71  |  Link
fight2win
What's in a name dude !
 
fight2win's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 331
why aren't jawor's matrices used in megui presets?
fight2win is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2007, 11:12   #72  |  Link
anubhavrocker
hurrra
 
anubhavrocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 12
This is a gr8 thread
anubhavrocker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2007, 18:43   #73  |  Link
cyfaws
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1
I'm getting very weird results from the comp check, like 140%. Any ideea what would cause such abnormal values?
cyfaws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2007, 18:52   #74  |  Link
Brother John
(schein)heilig
 
Brother John's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 512
That means your video is very “simple” to encode. You should reduce the target size, add audio tracks or anything else that eats space.

If you encode as is you’ll end up with a file smaller than your target size. But that doesn’t mean it’s bad quality.
__________________
Brother John

When lost in BeSweet's options, have a look at the Commandline Reference.
DVD nach MPEG-4 klappt nicht? Verzweifelt? Auf zum Encodingwissen!
Brother John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2007, 06:45   #75  |  Link
henryho_hk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 889
Comp. test result is target (sample) size divided by the compressed (sample) size. Hence, if you can accept a 70% "quality level", you can calculate your new target size as "old target size / 1.4 * 0.7".
henryho_hk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th January 2008, 13:33   #76  |  Link
Buggle
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
In the past I have done lots and lots of encoding, used to know which options to use which not, etcetera. After Xvid became final I got less interested in knowing everything and knowledge quickly decayed. I must say, after reading this thread my interests have sparked again!

I encoded a dvd episode using MPEG Matrix, but was not at all pleased with the result (although the quality should be very very high). I encoded, just for reference, a x264 crf19, finding out that is was about 180MB smaller. And still it looked better (sharper, less color bumping, etcetera). I played around a little with the settings, only to find no suitable answer to my needs. Encoding to 80%+ quality gives much other demands than queezing an encode on a CD...

Now that has led me to the interesting discovery that QPel actually made the file bigger. And as far as I know, QPel is supposed to bring the file size down if it was succesfull, so to speak.

And that, in turn, brings me to another question; how big is the room to play with in the presets? How much and which settings can be changed without breaking the presets value/goal?

As using Heini MR gives me a 141.3% compressibility with same settings and avs, whereas 6of9 gives only 81.3%. I would want to use 6of9 to retain the most 'truthful' picture, but cannot use the exact settings of the >90 preset.

Edit1: just finished the encode using the >90 preset even though I should not have used it. Picture looks absolutely horrible... I have the feeling 6of9 tries to encode too much of the noise present in the picture. There's so much mosquito noise around the edges, picture is totally 'flat'. Proof of the preset not being useful for <90 :P
Edit2: feel I am not really clear on what I mean, since >58 still uses 6of9. As I understand it correctly, 6of9 is able to retain the most detail in the picture, whereas other quant matrixes would give different results. What I mean to ask is this; could I use the settings in the highest preset together with, let's say, 6of9HVS? It feels a bit strange to go for >58 when in fact 80 is closer to 90 than 58. So for this reason I could still use 6of9 but change some little settings, keeping as much as possible of the 90 preset. But the question is, do I break anything doing that... and if so, which ones could easily be changed. My idea for instance would be to keep the CC settings (=off) but change to the B frame settings of >58.
Edit3: I've come to the conclusion that I do not like the results 6of9 gives me, even with 58 settings for an 80 clip. Going Q2 now with Heini, let's see what it will give me.

Last edited by Buggle; 24th January 2008 at 15:35.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2008, 05:51   #77  |  Link
henryho_hk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 889
Buggle, your findings are interesting. Would you please post some sample pictures here?
henryho_hk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2008, 06:23   #78  |  Link
squid_80
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne, AU
Posts: 1,963
The aim of QPel is to increase quality, not lower filesize.
squid_80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th January 2008, 09:43   #79  |  Link
Buggle
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryho_hk View Post
Buggle, your findings are interesting. Would you please post some sample pictures here?
Well, I think I have figured it out now, reading more about the Matrixes. I was comparing a normal Quant matrix (Heini MR) comptest @Q2 to a 6of9 also @Q2, which in fact should have been Q3. The comp tests are comparable now this way.

I am currently encoding it with V3HR, I like the results much better. I took a look at the source, only to see that it had some encoding errors in it already... Looks like someone messed up the encoding in the studio's. There were four points in the beginning of the ep (haven't seen more of it) that had some 'suspicious' pieces. One was for instance a face which had shimmering light on one side and shadow on the other. Looking at the encodes, the shadowside was very grainy/mosquito-ish, or differently said, plain ugly. That happend in other places as well. A different problem I noticed was little dancing colorplanes on the nose of Meredith Grey (yes, those episodes ).

Checking back with the source, I found out that it was that to blame; but encoding it made it look worse, but even more with 6of9 than with Heini MR or V3HR. To get a result I am happy with would take me some filtering, but I do not have the time to get into that. For now, I'll settle with V3HR and sharp bicubic (compcheck around 77%). The source is just too 'unruhig', I normally always use lanczos.

Last edited by Buggle; 25th January 2008 at 09:47.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2008, 23:06   #80  |  Link
#2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 114
Where to download the "Editing Only" profile.

Hi there.

Possibly a silly question. I can't find where to get this profile. Can some one tell me please.

Thanks
#2 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 08:34.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.