Gracias, Gracias, Gracias, Thanks, Thanks X 1000 :D
-kwag |
hehehe you're both welcome ;).
|
New version 0.7
I just uploaded to my site version 0.7, which has a new method: dithering. It's very similar to the noise method except it will add the same noise to each frame, creating a kind of "unchanging noise" effect.
I'm hoping that this will eliminate the artificial "movement" created in static parts of the frame by the noise method. Theoretically this might produce a more natural-looking result and might even be a little more compressible. Let me know if it works ;). |
New script?
Man, these filters are wonderful. What should be added to our AVS scripts to take full advantage of the new dithering feature in 0.7? I see the usage rules in the readme, but does anyone have some recommended parameters?
By the way, I've been using the KDVD *HALF* template and applying the fluxsmooth 0.4 and blockbuster 0.6 filters... FLAWLESS video. 8O I cranked the CQ up to 80 (just cause) and I can't tell the difference between the source file and the one that takes up a quarter of the space! I'm not worthy! :D |
Kwag,
Thanks for all your work, and just a quick question re your script that you posted for the LBR template. Should I change the BB_Resolution and BB_StrengthConstant lines to reflect PAL source (ie. 352*288), and what changes would need to be made to the script if I want to use the kvcd3 templates instead. I am capturing at 704*576. |
Re: New script?
Quote:
Blockbuster(method="dither", min_detail=1, max_detail=100, variance=50) and it should look like you're watching the clip through a speckled window. As for what you can do with it: test it! Let me know how it compares, in the final encode, to using method="noise" with the same parameters and with different parameters. As I said in the docs, it's experimental at the moment. So experiment ;). |
Re: New script?
Quote:
( Easy on the beer SansGrip, it's not time yet :lol: ) -kwag |
Re: New script?
Quote:
|
re:
Quote:
|
Re: re:
Quote:
Mind you, I didn't do a visual compare to see if the decrease in size was caused by an increase in blockiness, so YMMV ;). |
Looking good :D
I'm testing it like this: Blockbuster(method="dither", detail_min=1, detail_max=10, variance=.7) No need to dither high frequency components ( At least that's my thinking ). So just dither the areas where DCT blocks are present. Low lit, etc. -kwag |
Quote:
|
Re:
Arghh! Curse you SansGrip! The last thing I need is more choices...
At best, in my opinion, dither just looks different from noise. I guess it's just a matter of preference, eh? I would imagine some sources will look better when encoded with dither instead of noise, but in my case I couldn't tell much difference. Files are consistantly smaller with dither, but only by a few hundred kilobytes. As mentioned already, I'm using Kwags Half KDVD template. Source files are DVD rips. Keep up the hard work, guys! This stuff is amazing! Patent pending? :roll: |
Re:
Quote:
Quote:
My hope was/is that with the right variance setting it'll reduce the artificial "motion" I sometimes see on walls etc., with DCT blocks kinda jumping around. This occurs, I think, when the bit rate isn't quite high enough to describe the noise fully. Theoretically dither should stop that, since the noise never changes from frame to frame. A static wall should always have the same pattern of noise on it, and so the DCT blocks shouldn't jump. That's the theory anyway. We'll see if it works out in reality ;). |
@SansGrip,
I tested Blockbuster "dither" using 528x480 CQ version. Blockbuster(method="dither", detail_min=1, detail_max=10, variance=.7) I didn't notice any effect on the walls or any static background areas having a more stable appearance. Maybe Tmpgenc's CQ ignors this frequency. I increased detail_min and detail_max. It still looked the same. Have you made any tests that showed a differance. :) -black prince |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.