Quantcast KVCD Template with New Tweaks - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #1  
04-26-2002, 02:35 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
I've changed some parameters to the template, and I would like everyone to try them out.

The quality generated now is equal to, if not better, than SVCD.

At least on the latest trial runs i've done.

What I have done is tighten the GOP, instead of the 1-20-3-1, I changed it to 1-12-3-1.

The quality is much higher, because the B and P frames are closer together, but still I have been able to fit full 2 hour videos in one CD-R.


Please try out these changes in the standard NTSC or PAL template, and tell me your results.

I think that the 1-12-3-1 is a perfect balance between quality and file size.

With the original 1-20-3-1, in some videos, you could see some "Ghosting effects". Like on a panning scene, specially on anime, you could see small artifacts after some foreground object were moved.

With the GOP of 1-12-3-1, this doesn't happen.

The compression is a little less than with the original 1-20-3-1 but the quality is superb.

I believe this is a peak optimized GOP change, at least for TMPEG 2.53 MPEG-1.

So please try it out, and let's hear some feedback

I've had the best results this way, and quality is just outstanding.

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
  #2  
04-26-2002, 05:25 AM
bman bman is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 356
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi Kwag !
Just at right time !
As i already posted effect of "ghoast" on my 34" TV screen was very noticable from 1m distance . So i tryed some changes in GOP and got almost same result es you : I tryed 1-20-3-1, 1-15-3-1 & 1-10-3-1. The last one was with noticable better quaility with more stable video but file size 10-15% bigger. I hope that you succieded better than I and got better compromise with FILE Size & quality.

What about CD-R90 compatibility issue ? Any results ?

With 352x576 or 352x480 resolution file size > 800mb . I'm sure we can easily solve this problem !

At last two days was a little slower in this forum ??!

Must be good signe - no more questions , all clear !

I have to ask you :
When i'm trying to use temporalsmoother with avsynth script I get colors like at 16 color resolution . Why ?
Looks like IVSynth do not support RGB ???

Maybe you can make that clear for me !

Many thank's
bman
Reply With Quote
  #3  
04-26-2002, 10:58 AM
t1955feb t1955feb is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 30
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi kwag
I have used your new template and i was surpised.
I tried one movie 90 min 352x288 q 70 very good picture 460 mb
The sme movie 352X288 q 74 great picture 530 mb
So now i'am going to try at q 80

Great work keep it up

TJ
__________________
TJ
Reply With Quote
  #4  
04-26-2002, 11:45 AM
Bigswaffo Bigswaffo is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tejas
Posts: 86
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Kwag,
Would improving the GOP structure improve quality more than upping the CQ?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
04-26-2002, 01:17 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 bman
Hi Kwag !
Just at right time !
As i already posted effect of "ghoast" on my 34" TV screen was very noticable from 1m distance . So i tryed some changes in GOP and got almost same result es you : I tryed 1-20-3-1, 1-15-3-1 & 1-10-3-1. The last one was with noticable better quaility with more stable video but file size 10-15% bigger. I hope that you succieded better than I and got better compromise with FILE Size & quality.

What about CD-R90 compatibility issue ? Any results ?

With 352x576 or 352x480 resolution file size > 800mb . I'm sure we can easily solve this problem !

At last two days was a little slower in this forum ??!

Must be good signe - no more questions , all clear !

I have to ask you :
When i'm trying to use temporalsmoother with avsynth script I get colors like at 16 color resolution . Why ?
Looks like IVSynth do not support RGB ???

Maybe you can make that clear for me !

Many thank's
bman
Hi bman. You're right! AviSynth doesn't support RGB.

If your source is RGB use the function ConvertToYUY2()

Here's an excerp from the AviSynth manual:

ConvertToYUY2 / ConvertToRGB
ConvertToYUY2(clip)
ConvertToRGB(clip)

Avisynth can deal internally with two color formats, RGB and YUY2. These two filters convert between them. If the video is already in the specified format, it will be passed through unchanged.

As of Avisynth v0.3, the following filters do not support RGB input:

SpatialSoften
TemporalSoften
FixLuminance
PeculiarBlend
If you try to use any of these filters with RGB input, you will get an error. Putting ConvertToYUY2 just before the offending filter should resolve the problem. All Avisynth filters support YUY2 input.

In most cases, the ConvertToRGB filter should not be necessary. If Avisynth's output is in YUY2 format and an application expects RGB, the system will use the installed YUY2 codec to make the conversion. However, if there's no installed YUY2 codec, or if (as is the case with ATI's YUY2 codec) the codec converts from YUY2 to RGB incorrectly, you can use Avisynth's built-in filter to convert instead.

Huffyuv will act as the system YUY2 codec if there's no other codec installed, so if you install Huffyuv and uninstall all other YUY2 codecs, then you'll never need ConvertToRGB.


kwag
Reply With Quote
  #6  
04-26-2002, 01:20 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 Bigswaffo
Kwag,
Would improving the GOP structure improve quality more than upping the CQ?
Hi Bigswaffo:

Yes. With the new adjustment to 1-12-3-1, the quality is improved, even if the CQ is left at 70.

kwag
Reply With Quote
  #7  
04-26-2002, 01:25 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 t1955feb
Hi kwag
I have used your new template and i was surpised.
I tried one movie 90 min 352x288 q 70 very good picture 460 mb
The sme movie 352X288 q 74 great picture 530 mb
So now i'am going to try at q 80

Great work keep it up

TJ
Hi t1955feb:

I do the same thing!. But I am seeing a pattern here, that I use for calculations.

Every time you add 4 to the CQ, the file size is about 100MB larger.
So on the video you're doing, the CQ=80 will be closer to 800MB, but your quality will be just awesome.

When it's done, post your results, so that we may confirm that steps of +-4 are equal to about +-100MB.

kwag
Reply With Quote
  #8  
04-27-2002, 08:51 AM
bman bman is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 356
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi Kwag !

Thank's for tips with AVISYNTH !
To make it easier for me : maybe you can give me a list of all codecs I need to get AVISYNTH work properly !!!
(better if you have site where be possible to download them from )

Best to all

bman
Reply With Quote
  #9  
04-27-2002, 05:55 PM
energy80s energy80s is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 33
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Kwag, is it just the GOP that has changed in this new template, or are there other changes too? If it's just the GOP, then I'll manually alter mine rather than download/re-load another template.

Rodney.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
04-27-2002, 06:28 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 energy80s
Kwag, is it just the GOP that has changed in this new template, or are there other changes too? If it's just the GOP, then I'll manually alter mine rather than download/re-load another template.

Rodney.
Here's the info link:
http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=43

Just a couple of changes.

kwag
Reply With Quote
  #11  
04-27-2002, 07:48 PM
kasun000 kasun000 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 18
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi everybody, my first time on this board.

kwag, your Template is awesome.
I also like your new tweak but I change your method around little.
Specially on anime which giving much clear view.

I change to your Gop and Un-checked under "Quantize Matrix" the "No motion search for still picture part by half pixel.
I use rate control mode to CQ_VBR with max bitrate to 2300 and min bitrate to 300 and motion search to high quality.

Which doesn't show much blockest on anime.
Specially on subtitle on the anime, which doesn't show blockest on text.

edited: forgot to mention quality slide of CQ_VBR is 70.

kasun000
Reply With Quote
  #12  
04-27-2002, 08:21 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 kasun000
Hi everybody, my first time on this board.

kwag, your Template is awesome.
I also like your new tweak but I change your method around little.
Specially on anime which giving much clear view.

I change to your Gop and Un-checked under "Quantize Matrix" the "No motion search for still picture part by half pixel.
I use rate control mode to CQ_VBR with max bitrate to 2300 and min bitrate to 300 and motion search to high quality.

Which doesn't show much blockest on anime.
Specially on subtitle on the anime, which doesn't show blockest on text.

edited: forgot to mention quality slide of CQ_VBR is 70.

kasun000
Hi kasun000:

Thanks!

As for the "No motion search for still picture part by half pixel", that was one of the changes for the new templates posted earlier today!.

Good to see other people finding optimal settings for TMPEG.

As for the CQ_VBR, I did try it, but I got better compression with the CQ, probably because of the P Picture spoilage and B picture spoilage that are not available under CQ_VBR. At least with TMPEG 2.53.

Try the new templates posted today. You'll get even better quality than with the old one.

kwag
Reply With Quote
  #13  
04-28-2002, 06:40 AM
kasun000 kasun000 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 18
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
kwag, After testing your template and mine for anime. I saw small line on screen on my tv
(only could see real close to tv, from far distance couldn't see the small line).

I think mine didn't show alot block but your template sort of show more block.

kasun000
Reply With Quote
  #14  
04-29-2002, 02:52 AM
bman bman is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 356
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi Kwag !

About template updates or changes , I would like to suggest that at home page you'll add date of last change or update .

It will be easyer to follow I think .

Best regards

bman
Reply With Quote
  #15  
04-29-2002, 08:02 AM
kasun000 kasun000 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 18
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
As for the CQ_VBR, I did try it, but I got better compression with the CQ, probably because of the P Picture spoilage and B picture spoilage that are not available under CQ_VBR. At least with TMPEG 2.53.
Yup you were right, after testing both them was giving same quailty the CQ_VBR file was larger and CQ was smaller then CQ_VBR.

btw if I selected noise reduction, I know it will take long to encode but does the file size get larger?

kasun000
Reply With Quote
  #16  
04-29-2002, 11:14 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 bman
Hi Kwag !

About template updates or changes , I would like to suggest that at home page you'll add date of last change or update .

It will be easyer to follow I think .

Best regards

bman
Hi bman:

Will make a note of that some time today.

Thanks,
kwag
Reply With Quote
  #17  
04-29-2002, 11:18 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 kasun000
Quote:
As for the CQ_VBR, I did try it, but I got better compression with the CQ, probably because of the P Picture spoilage and B picture spoilage that are not available under CQ_VBR. At least with TMPEG 2.53.
Yup you were right, after testing both them was giving same quailty the CQ_VBR file was larger and CQ was smaller then CQ_VBR.

btw if I selected noise reduction, I know it will take long to encode but does the file size get larger?

kasun000
Hi kasun000:

If you use the internal TMPEG noise reduction, the encoding time will be much longer. It can be over 50% longer in encoding time.

You should process your file with an AviSynth script, using the TemporalSmoother filter, and this way it won't be as slow as using the internal TMPEG filter.

kwag
Reply With Quote
  #18  
04-29-2002, 11:58 AM
kasun000 kasun000 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 18
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi Kwag

I search and found avisynth, which I'm new to this. I have no clue to work this. Could you help me out, btw where I could find temporalSmoother filter?

thank

kasun000

edited: I'm going post in Avisynth selection so General discussion on KVCD Templates won't flood with Avisynth post.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
04-29-2002, 12:12 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 kasun000
Hi Kwag

I search and found avisynth, which I'm new to this. I have no clue to work this. Could you help me out, btw where I could find temporalSmoother filter?

thank

kasun000
Hi kasun000:

You can start reading here. All the information applies to AviSynth:


http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic....b12f699158de7f

kwag
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
KVCD: Which template would be the best template to use? Fistandantilus Video Encoding and Conversion 4 08-30-2003 05:13 AM
kvcd: difference between the lbr template and the 352x240 template? bigggt Video Encoding and Conversion 6 05-02-2003 12:04 AM
KVCD: Plus template ok, x3 template not? Daznic Video Encoding and Conversion 1 08-30-2002 10:36 AM
KVCD new beta template - user experiences, tweaks and hacks? kwag Video Encoding and Conversion 56 07-19-2002 07:30 AM
KVCD: A few tweaks from the standard? gonz0 Video Encoding and Conversion 5 05-13-2002 08:07 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:37 PM  —  vBulletin Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd