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. |
![]() |
#21081 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 172
|
Quote:
[09/12/14] BD Rebuilder v0.48.05 (beta) [18:21:48] Source: L_UOMO_CHE_FISSA_LE_CAPRE_00000 - Input BD size: 20,18 GB - Approximate total content: [01:34:03.971] - Windows Version: 6.1 [7601] - MOVIE-ONLY/ALTERNATE OUTPUT mode enabled - Mode: MKV Container, 1920x1080, Intact Audio - Decoding/Frame serving: X264/LAVF - Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640 [18:21:51] PHASE ONE, Encoding - [18:21:51] Processing: VID_00000 (1 of 1) - [18:21:51] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00000] - [18:33:32] Reencoding video [VID_00000] - Source Video: VC-1, 1920x1080 - Rate/Length: 23,976fps, 135.320 frames - [18:33:32] Reencoding: VID_00000, Pass 1 of 1 - [19:17:24] Video Encode complete - [19:17:24] Processing audio tracks - Track 4352 (ita): Keeping original audio [19:17:24]PHASE ONE complete [19:17:24]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started - [19:17:24] Building ALTERNATE OUTPUT Structure [19:18:14] - Encode and Rebuild complete [19:18:14] JOB: L_UOMO_CHE_FISSA_LE_CAPRE finished. ---------------------- [09/12/14] BD Rebuilder v0.48.05 (beta) [19:54:59] Source: L_UOMO_CHE_FISSA_LE_CAPRE_00000 - Input BD size: 20,18 GB - Approximate total content: [01:34:03.971] - Windows Version: 6.1 [7601] - MOVIE-ONLY/ALTERNATE OUTPUT mode enabled - Mode: MKV Container, 1920x1080, Intact Audio - Decoding/Frame serving: DirectShow - Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=0 Kbs=640 [19:55:02] PHASE ONE, Encoding - [19:55:02] Processing: VID_00000 (1 of 1) - [19:55:02] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00000] - [20:07:00] Reencoding video [VID_00000] - Source Video: VC-1, 1920x1080 - Rate/Length: 23,976fps, 135.320 frames - [20:07:00] Reencoding: VID_00000, Pass 1 of 1 - [21:18:29] Video Encode complete - [21:18:29] Processing audio tracks - Track 4352 (ita): Keeping original audio [21:18:29]PHASE ONE complete [21:18:29]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started - [21:18:29] Building ALTERNATE OUTPUT Structure [21:21:23] - Encode and Rebuild complete [21:21:23] JOB: L_UOMO_CHE_FISSA_LE_CAPRE finished. ***** Both done at Fastest encoding option, CRF 20, NO Multiprocess. Feel free to ask further information- |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21082 | Link | |
Moderator
![]() Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,108
|
Quote:
Based on my tests, it looks like you will see a reduction in file size of between 31-33% for an identical level of quality when you create a backup MKV using HEVC rather than AVC. That doesn't reach the 50% reduction you see advertised often -- but that's probably because I'm testing at higher quality levels and bitrates (typical of a backup). HEVC would likely get higher reduction levels while maintaing the same quality when it is forced to fit into highly constrained bitrates (like you might see in satellite transmission). Also, I'm using a single source video across all my testing... but I think that's ok for what I'm trying to accomplish. I'm now doing SSIM tests to see how closely it aligns with PSNR. But SSIM testing is pretty slow... Last edited by jdobbs; 13th September 2014 at 14:38. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21083 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,041
|
You have probably already seen the x264/x265 comparative discussion here.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21084 | Link | |
Moderator
![]() Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,108
|
Quote:
Last edited by jdobbs; 13th September 2014 at 14:39. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21085 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,059
|
Quote:
__________________
If you fail to plan; you plan to fail, would you not agree? Think about it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21086 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 172
|
Quote:
Other than this building to ALTERNATE, CRF 20, Better speed, and FFDshow frame serving I scored 1.7x speed than with LAVF. No MULTIPROCESS FYI. @JD When your H265 code will be ready it will be time for another donation, as you're doing a heck of a work. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21087 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,268
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21088 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,268
|
Quote:
Thanks for the information about encoding speed; it is indeed quite curious as to the difference in speed now. I'm gonna keep working on it to see if I can figure it out. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21089 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,268
|
This was interesting. A reply on the basic BDRB guide thread at ClubMice came up and the fellow who updates the guide there said this:
"The latest version as I am writing this post is 0.48.05. I've noticed some different behavior in the program regarding frame-serving. Jdobbs has added a line that can make DirectShowSource the default frame server, and has removed an option to use FFVideoSource that was only in the program for a few editions before being abandoned. The reason I mention this is that CRF encoding seems to be disabled when using the internal LAV filters for frame serving. You'll need to select DirectShowSource if you intend to make a one pass CRF encoding." I didn't really quite understand what he was saying about the LAV filters (which I use) Would this have anything at all to do with my slower encoding speeds now as opposed to before...? I DO normally use High Quality, 2 Pass though; it doesn't seem like that would be affected by what he is talking about. Do you suppose that some of my 'Tweaks' are being processed or treated differently than before? These are the standard tweaks that I use when encoding either a rather large and/or a rather demanding Blu-ray: TWEAK_PASS_TWO=--deblock -1:-1 --psy-rd 1.00:0.20 --me umh --subme 8 --trellis 2 --direct auto --qcomp 0.50 --b-adapt 2 Again, in the past when incorporating these same tweaks and primary settings with just about any Blu-ray, the 2nd pass would normally take around 6-7 hours. Now it takes 11-12 (BTW, your HQ setting I believe already sets the me & subme at these values if I'm not mistaken - at 'Highest' it sets the subme at 9 which is indeed overkill and did take forever, but these specific tweaks never really added that much time before) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21090 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,041
|
Quote:
- Why tweak like this? You risk to spoil pass 1 by forcing conflicting settings in pass 2. Leave --trellis 2 and --direct auto and --qcomp 0.50 and --b-adapt 2 away, or better just select Auto-quality and see what you gain in speed, and tell us the difference in quality. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21091 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,268
|
Quote:
When you say 'Conflicting settings', isn't adding Tweaks merely choosing stronger settings for the final 2nd pass than would normally be determined by a first pass based upon an Auto or lesser setting? In other words, aren't you just 'Telling' x264 to use those higher settings rather than relying on what it's first pass 'Determines' based upon the Auto or a lighter setting? Is there really a 'Conflict'? I'm still VERY green at this, so I'm probably just missing something important here, but just going by what I've learned so far, that is how I understand it. FWIW, the encodes that I've been doing have turned out breathtakingly beautiful! The delineation and the depth of field especially in long shots or dark shots is pretty amazing. But, perhaps I would get that anyway with Auto ![]() Oh, I'll check my last command txt too next time I do an encode. BTW, it appears that perhaps my major PC issue may indeed be heat related; I'm working on that now. Thanks for the suggestions! Last edited by Lathe; 14th September 2014 at 01:08. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21092 | Link | |
Moderator
![]() Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,108
|
Quote:
Last edited by jdobbs; 14th September 2014 at 01:14. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21093 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,059
|
I am assuming jdobbs at this stage it gone be only MKV.
On a side note I am thinking when time comes you will be able to offer 4K bluray support since tsmuxer already works with 4K and hevc. May I ask which hevc encoder you are using and build if possible.
__________________
If you fail to plan; you plan to fail, would you not agree? Think about it. Last edited by HWK; 14th September 2014 at 02:23. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21094 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,041
|
You can't wildly play with special settings for pass 2. Some are ok, others must be identical to pass 1. Let BD-RB do it's job without any "smart tweaks" which will disqualify for a BD-RB bug report -- see jdobb's statement in this respect.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21095 | Link | |
Moderator
![]() Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,108
|
Quote:
Yeah, I'm hoping to get ahead of the power-curve on 4K bluray (and HEVC at HD res). Right now I'm just implementing MKV support. Last edited by jdobbs; 14th September 2014 at 14:36. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21099 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,268
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21100 | Link | ||
Moderator
![]() Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,108
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|