Quantcast Avisynth: Mergechroma to Gain Compression? - Page 2 - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #21  
02-22-2003, 11:41 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorel
@ Kwag and "friendalunit"

really good....and thanks for scripts!

ps:

now i'm mad.
my last beer broke the ring..... searching for a to open this!
Ahh!, well, I'm having a little red wine today. Just opened a bottle of Spanish wine of "Torre Oria" (1994)
So I'll be a little in a while

Opps , kwag, this is not a chat room. Breaking rule #9,019234.0 will send you to a corner for 2 hours with a



-kwag
Reply With Quote
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Site Staff / Ad Manager
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #22  
02-22-2003, 11:45 PM
jorel jorel is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brasil - MG - third stone from the sun
Posts: 5,570
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts


and without wine or beer,only water.

oh no,this is hell!

Reply With Quote
  #23  
02-23-2003, 12:12 AM
heyitsme heyitsme is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: pullman, WA
Posts: 129
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via MSN to heyitsme
I love this forum. Not only for the talented people that provide their knowledge but for the fact everybody has a little fun. I get plently of laughs just reading some your guys posts.
Quote:
Opps , kwag, this is not a chat room. Breaking rule #9,019234.0 will send you to a corner for 2 hours with a
Kwag you crack me up man! Thanks Jellygoosse for bringing this mergechroma to our attention!

Branden
[/quote]
__________________
Eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die
Reply With Quote
  #24  
02-23-2003, 12:20 AM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by heyitsme
Kwag you crack me up man!
Have a beer Branden
Quote:
Thanks Jellygoosse for bringing this mergechroma to our attention!
Yeah, I just knew this thread was going to take us somewhere . These filters really make a huge difference. Anyone encoding at 352x240(28 with all these filters added up, can actually encode with CQ=100 and get a ~120 minute movie on one CD , and even at CQ=100, sampler size is still below wanted size (on most movies)

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #25  
02-23-2003, 10:18 AM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Guys I just hate this time difference! Everybody is having a beer while I'm sleeping...
Someday we just have to meet at a special time and just get drunk online and chat... then we copy-paste the whole session and post it in the forum somewhere .

As for the "Maniac Filtering"... I really like the clip you posted. But I don't know if this is maybe a little too much filtering... Well I think the results speak for themselves, but since I haven't seen the DVD I can't compare... still MergeChroma and MergeLuma just have been deported to my standardscript...
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #26  
02-23-2003, 11:26 AM
KingTuk KingTuk is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 107
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Kwag,

As long as you are going for "Maniac" filtering...

try putting your NoMo settings to

NoMoSmooth(30,2,6,2,6)

so it will be more aggressive to motion...

Also did you try

DctFilter(1,1,1,1,1,.5,.5,0) before spacedust() in your script?

some movies the dctfilter works good on and others very little...
Reply With Quote
  #27  
02-23-2003, 11:26 AM
jamesp jamesp is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Chelmsford, UK
Posts: 130
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
WOW - KWAG Strikes again! My results using a 1 minute analogue tv capture using KDVD:

No Filtering at all : 32mb
PixieDust + Temporal Cleaner : 23 mb
Pixie Dust + Temporal Cleaner + DCT Filter - 22mb
Pixie Dust + Temporal Cleaner + Merge Chorma + Merge Luma - 17.5mb !!!!!

Can't see a lot of difference on my pc, although the one with the 2 merge statements seems a little softer, its still sharper than using fluxsmooth and temporalsmoother. Will try a whole film and see if the wife notices a difference!

Jim
Reply With Quote
  #28  
02-23-2003, 11:46 AM
KingTuk KingTuk is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 107
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
jamesp,

Instead of Pixiedust...
try

spacedust()
NoMoSmooth(30,2,6,2,6)

same results or better in less time...
Reply With Quote
  #29  
02-23-2003, 02:00 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingTuk
Kwag,

As long as you are going for "Maniac" filtering...

try putting your NoMo settings to

NoMoSmooth(30,2,6,2,6)
I already did, but I used other values on the script . I also used Lanczos and dropped BLockbuster(sharpen) and a couple of small adjustments. Here's the final script I used last night to encode the complete S1M0NE movie:



Code:
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\mpeg2dec.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\GripFit_preview.dll") 
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\blockbuster.dll") 
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\legalclip.dll") 
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\sampler.dll") 
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\dustv5.dll") 
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\temporalcleanerold.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\nomosmooth.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\fluxsmooth.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\convolution3d")

Mpeg2Source("K:\S1M0NE_WS\VIDEO_TS\simone.d2v")
LegalClip() 
mergechroma(blur(1.58)) 
mergeluma(blur(0.6)) 
GripCrop( width=528, height=480, overscan=2 ) 
GripSize(resizer="lanczosresize") 
SpaceDust()
FluxSmooth(7,7)
NoMoSmooth(40,1,6,1,3,false)
Convolution3d(preset="movieHQ")
GripBorders() 
LegalClip() 
#Sampler(length=24)
Quote:

Also did you try

DctFilter(1,1,1,1,1,.5,.5,0) before spacedust() in your script?
Yes I did, but there's was no significant difference in size or quality when used with all the filters above.
Here's what I got with these settings and a CQ value of 71: http://www.kvcd.net/s1m0ne-final.mpg

Remember, this script is just a test. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200 dollars

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #30  
02-24-2003, 06:59 AM
GFR GFR is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 438
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
What about trying the merge* filters after resize?
Reply With Quote
  #31  
02-24-2003, 07:21 AM
urban tec urban tec is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: West Australia
Posts: 272
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I wondered how long it would take till one of these threads got started

Thanks Jellygoose!

I too hate this time difference, it all happens while I am sleeping.

Quote:
Yeah, I just knew this thread was going to take us somewhere . These filters really make a huge difference. Anyone encoding at 352x240(28 with all these filters added up, can actually encode with CQ=100 and get a ~120 minute movie on one CD , and even at CQ=100, sampler size is still below wanted size (on most movies)
Maybe a full movie on one floppy is dreaming but how about on one of the 200mb mini disks this could have ramifactions for the pocket pc encodes
Reply With Quote
  #32  
02-24-2003, 07:57 AM
Boulder Boulder is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Lahti, Finland
Posts: 1,652
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
@all: If you use DCTFilter, it should be used as the last filtering item in your script. LegalClip/Limiter and Sampler should be after it, of course, but other than that keep it as the last item. The author, Tom Barry, suggested this himself. The filter zeroes some DCT coefficients and the zeros are the ones that increase compression IIRC.

Tom has also released a new version of the filter which includes diagonal filtering. I posted the link earlier in this thread, check it out if you're interested.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
02-24-2003, 08:20 AM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks for that tip Boulder
I'll try that later this afternoon. I had the DCTFilter on top
So that's probably why I didn't get the effect of more compression .

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #34  
02-24-2003, 02:29 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi boulder,

Ok I tried DCTFIlter after all filters and before the last GripBorders(), but I guess all filters above are already doing a superb job, and the difference was only 102KB smaller on a full sampler run. There is no visual difference at all with or without DCTFilter. Here's the script I tried:



Code:
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\mpeg2dec.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\GripFit_preview.dll") 
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\blockbuster.dll") 
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\legalclip.dll") 
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\sampler.dll") 
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\dustv5.dll") 
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\temporalcleanerold.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\nomosmooth.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\fluxsmooth.dll")
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\convolution3d")
LoadPlugin("C:\encoding\dctfilter_YUY2")

Mpeg2Source("K:\S1M0NE_WS\VIDEO_TS\simone.d2v")
LegalClip() 
mergechroma(blur(1.58)) 
mergeluma(blur(0.6)) 
GripCrop( width=528, height=480, overscan=2 ) 
GripSize(resizer="lanczosresize") 
SpaceDust()
FluxSmooth(7,7)
NoMoSmooth(40,1,6,1,3,false)
Convolution3d(preset="movieHQ")
DctFilter(1,1,1,1,1,1,.5,0)
GripBorders() 
LegalClip() 
Sampler(length=24)
-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #35  
02-24-2003, 02:40 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi kwag!

On my sample-run of "51st State" the DCT-Filter saved me 563kb compared to the script only with MergeChroma and MergeLuma... It's not a lot but maybe a couple of MBs in the complete movie... I think it depends on the source... since it's a quite fast filter I'll leave it in my standardscript...
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #36  
02-24-2003, 02:48 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellygoose
since it's a quite fast filter I'll leave it in my standardscript...
Good idea
I will too

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #37  
02-24-2003, 04:46 PM
jamesp jamesp is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Chelmsford, UK
Posts: 130
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi all. I've been running a few tests. Does anyone else think using both the merge statements actually makes the image look too blurry?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
02-24-2003, 05:02 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesp
Hi all. I've been running a few tests. Does anyone else think using both the merge statements actually makes the image look too blurry?
You can drop this line: mergeluma(blur(0.6)) and it will look sharper, but your file size will increase. Or you can lower the blur value to increase sharpness.
Viewed on regular TV's, it looks about the same with or without the filters. On a HDTV, it clearly looks much softer. As I said above on a previous post, the script is only for test purpose

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #39  
02-24-2003, 05:07 PM
jamesp jamesp is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Chelmsford, UK
Posts: 130
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesp
Hi all. I've been running a few tests. Does anyone else think using both the merge statements actually makes the image look too blurry?
You can drop this line: mergeluma(blur(0.6)) and it will look sharper, but your file size will increase. Or you can lower the blur value to increase sharpness.
Viewed on regular TV's, it looks about the same with or without the filters. On a HDTV, it clearly looks much softer. As I said above on a previous post, the script is only for test purpose

-kwag
And testing is Fun

Actually, if i drop the Mergeluma line i hardly get any extra compression at all. I'm going to experiment with reducing the value. Any ideas how this filter actually works? Does the video actually get blurred or does it merge information from the blurred video into the proper video. Could we pass another filter into it, like spacedust or temporal cleaner?

Jim
Reply With Quote
  #40  
02-24-2003, 05:10 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesp
Could we pass another filter into it, like spacedust or temporal cleaner?

Jim
Hi Jim,

Well, you already have NoMo and SpaceDust in there, so I don't think there is need to add another temporal or spatial filter

-kwag
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Avisynth: New compression filters? tengo6dedos Avisynth Scripting 17 04-27-2008 02:56 PM
Avisynth: Good compression? muhali3 Avisynth Scripting 10 10-14-2003 05:18 PM
Avisynth: Is there a filter for increasing compression even more? audioslave Avisynth Scripting 70 08-08-2003 08:39 AM
Avisynth: mergeLuma and mergechroma? Wolfi Avisynth Scripting 7 05-05-2003 04:38 AM
Avisynth: Increasing compression through preprocessing SansGrip Avisynth Scripting 67 01-29-2003 11:00 AM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:14 AM  —  vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd