Quantcast KVCD Template vs. TMPGEnc Defaults? - Page 2 - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #21  
07-01-2002, 01:56 PM
deltaboy deltaboy is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 108
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
i never liked andreas matrix, it always appeared unsmooth and noisy. glad to hear that all the templates are back to using the default. hey KWAG, try changing the B/P spoilage back to 0/20, ive noticed significant filesize reduction with it back to its default as well.

question: anybody know if the default matrix in tmpgenc is the same as the natural image matrix within the panasonic encoder? ive always liked the results that pwi could produce, besides the color crap-out. i wonder if there is a way to extraxt the internal settings from panasonic and compare and test them.
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  
07-01-2002, 02:42 PM
davelanton davelanton is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
That's actually what i thought was the reason. Although, someone coming in to confirm the 2cd template being blocky beyond CQ 54 would be nice.
I am using the KVCDx2 2-CD templates to encode NTSC programs captured with AVI_IO MJPEG=19. The CQ=70 and the quality is amazing! No blockiness at all. Could the problem be related to ripped sources rather than AVI?
Reply With Quote
  #23  
07-01-2002, 02:59 PM
MoovyGuy MoovyGuy is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 118
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hey All,

I've also been running similar tests using the KDVD templates.

Here's a file listing of my results for a 2 min & 26 second trailer from the Star Wars Ep one DVD, using the Kwag GOP and a standard matrix;

GOP Used: 1-18-3-1-18

36,184,068 Full-D1-CQ.mpg
29,374,468 New-Full-D1-CQ-70.mpg
26,722,308 New-Full-D1-CQ-65.mpg

I found that at a CQ of 65 it looked very good but there were some artifacts, but bringing the CQ up to 70 improved the visual quality up to what the "Andreas" matrix provided.

At a CQ of 70, this is still significantly smaller than what "Andreas" provides.


22,337,540 Half-D1-CQ.mpg
21,948,420 New-Half-D1-CQ-75.mpg

18,079,748 New-Half-D1-CQ-65.mpg

Half D1 is a different story, it seems that only at a CQ of 75 do I get a result similar to the Andreas version but the file size is almost the same. Personally, I think that the Andreas matrix encoded version still looks a little better in this test anyway, I guess it'll need some more playing with.

Hope this info is usefull ....

Later
Reply With Quote
  #24  
07-01-2002, 03:12 PM
Daagar Daagar is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 158
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
GOP Used: 1-18-3-1-18

Why the non-Kwag GOP? Since it is known that the 1-18-3-1-48 provides better compression, this may have skewed your results some (at least if others do the same test).
Reply With Quote
  #25  
07-01-2002, 05:31 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 deltaboy
i never liked andreas matrix, it always appeared unsmooth and noisy. glad to hear that all the templates are back to using the default. hey KWAG, try changing the B/P spoilage back to 0/20, ive noticed significant filesize reduction with it back to its default as well.
DAMN DAMN DAMN #$%@$# It was supposed to be 0/20 and not 0/0
Just too many details to keep track. Thanks again deltaboy
I'm updating all templates in a few minutes.......

.......Verified. Done.

kwag
Reply With Quote
  #26  
07-01-2002, 09:36 PM
MoovyGuy MoovyGuy is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 118
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daagar
Quote:
GOP Used: 1-18-3-1-18

Why the non-Kwag GOP? Since it is known that the 1-18-3-1-48 provides better compression, this may have skewed your results some (at least if others do the same test).
Yes, but I'm not testing the KVCD templates, but the KDVD templates. 1-18-3-1-18 is the same GOP as in the KDVD templates with the Andreas matrix.

This is not the DVD standard GOP that TMPGenc has. DVD compatibility demands following strict guidlines.

TMPGenc's standard DVD GOP for NTSC is 1-5-2-1-18.

Don't get me wrong, I'm just following what was in Kwags template. I have no idea what the difference between the two GOPs is or what they mean.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
07-02-2002, 07:40 AM
pacodoni pacodoni is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 78
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to pacodoni
Hey guys, help me out on this one...

Iīve been using the Kwagīs GOP on the Default TMPGENC matrix, but i havenīt made the results you guys made...

I try to encode ALI. Itīs not a difficult movie, low action, no underwater...
The image is good ( CQ 60 ) but still not good in filesize... ( 15 min = 149,678 )

Itīs about 9,8 per min, so it will not fit even a 90 min movie

Any suggestion ?

Thanks !

By the way : The templates in the download page are already with the GOP ( Kwag ) and TMPGENC ( matrix ) Changed ?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
07-02-2002, 09:57 AM
Daagar Daagar is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 158
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Yes, but I'm not testing the KVCD templates, but the KDVD templates. 1-18-3-1-18 is the same GOP as in the KDVD templates with the Andreas matrix.
Sorry, my mistake. I don't read the acronyms closely enough!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
07-02-2002, 01:37 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 pacodoni
Hey guys, help me out on this one...

Iīve been using the Kwagīs GOP on the Default TMPGENC matrix, but i havenīt made the results you guys made...

I try to encode ALI. Itīs not a difficult movie, low action, no underwater...
The image is good ( CQ 60 ) but still not good in filesize... ( 15 min = 149,678 )

Itīs about 9,8 per min, so it will not fit even a 90 min movie

Any suggestion ?

Thanks !

By the way : The templates in the download page are already with the GOP ( Kwag ) and TMPGENC ( matrix ) Changed ?
Yes. All templates are updated with default matrix and KVCD GOP.
About your movie, is it a wide screen or full screen movie?
Also did you do IVTC?

kwag
Reply With Quote
  #30  
07-02-2002, 01:59 PM
pacodoni pacodoni is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 78
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to pacodoni
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
Quote:
Originally Posted by pacodoni
Hey guys, help me out on this one...

Iīve been using the Kwagīs GOP on the Default TMPGENC matrix, but i havenīt made the results you guys made...

I try to encode ALI. Itīs not a difficult movie, low action, no underwater...
The image is good ( CQ 60 ) but still not good in filesize... ( 15 min = 149,678 )

Itīs about 9,8 per min, so it will not fit even a 90 min movie

Any suggestion ?

Thanks !

By the way : The templates in the download page are already with the GOP ( Kwag ) and TMPGENC ( matrix ) Changed ?
Yes. All templates are updated with default matrix and KVCD GOP.
About your movie, is it a wide screen or full screen movie?
Also did you do IVTC?

kwag
Quote:

Itīs a widescreen, and no, no IVCT...
iīll try that

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #31  
07-02-2002, 02:11 PM
sterogers sterogers is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 35
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Kwag

I have been converting your templates to 352x240 VCD and 480x480 SVCD. These formats are the only two that work both in the Apex 1500 and the Apex 1200.

Using test samples, I converted older and newer templates to 480x480 SVCD. Older templates convert better (size/quality). I also tinkered with old matrix and GOP settings. I got smaller filesize with my testing using older GOP (1-12-3-1-0) than with newer GOP (1-18-3-1-0). I thought newer GOP settings would create smaller file size. Could it just be the sample 10 min clip I'm doing??

Thanks!!
Reply With Quote
  #32  
07-02-2002, 03:24 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 sterogers
Kwag

I have been converting your templates to 352x240 VCD and 480x480 SVCD. These formats are the only two that work both in the Apex 1500 and the Apex 1200.

Using test samples, I converted older and newer templates to 480x480 SVCD. Older templates convert better (size/quality). I also tinkered with old matrix and GOP settings. I got smaller filesize with my testing using older GOP (1-12-3-1-0) than with newer GOP (1-18-3-1-0). I thought newer GOP settings would create smaller file size. Could it just be the sample 10 min clip I'm doing??

Thanks!!
You are correct!. The older GOP produced smaller file size, but also produces a flashing effect on the video with long scenes, because of the longer GOP. That's why the last value was changed from 0 to 48, so that the GOP's would be shorter.
The flashing effect had been confimed by many people who used the old GOP. The new 1-18-3-1-48 fixes that.

kwag
Reply With Quote
  #33  
07-02-2002, 04:14 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 I still use the original KVCD template as I think it gives better quality than any of the later versions. I have never seen this "flashing" that you describe. Is it very noticable?
Reply With Quote
  #34  
07-02-2002, 04:49 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 I still use the original KVCD template as I think it gives better quality than any of the later versions. I have never seen this "flashing" that you describe. Is it very noticable?
Yes it is!. In the sample I had from "Under Siege 2", it was very visible.
It all depends on the movie and the scene.

kwag
Reply With Quote
  #35  
07-03-2002, 04:32 AM
ANDREAS ANDREAS is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hello every one,

this matrix have a history. First, the matrix is develop for a MPEG2 video stream for a standard SVCD an ~120min with 2pass on 2cds. Second, the old TMPEG versions have many problems with the B-frames. From the second B-frames the encoder had not enougth bitrate for the other B-frames. The 99 is only to save blockness in the movie. Detail and motion are not so good. My tests (renew article ) have shown, that the 99 Matrix is not so good for ths KVCD. I take only the standard matrix from TMPEG and if I test other solutions I have only develop a new matix for 448 x 320 and 320 x 432 motion area. For the new generation of TMPEG 2.54 and higher I thing we have develop a new solution for the MPEG2 standard SVCD.

I have encode my first whole movie. It is "rush hour 2" in PAL with 84min playing time. The result is :

CQ68, min 650kbps, max 2550kbps, P and B frame with 0

In the first step I used virtual dub with filter and frame server and secound TMPEG CQ. The amount of the file is 832000 MB by 126795 frames. The quality is better as a VHS tape but a little bit more worse then a very good S-VHS tape (copied from DVD PAL with an macrovisionsdecoder to a very good S-VHS video-tape recorder).

ANDREAS
__________________
DVD-SVCD-FORUM.de
Reply With Quote
  #36  
07-03-2002, 08:14 AM
sterogers sterogers is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 35
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Kwag,

You misread my post. The old template I used was ( 1-12-3-1-0 ) compared to ( 1-18-3-1-0 ). I haven't tested ( 1-12-3-1-48 ) versus ( 1-18-3-1-48 ) yet though.

Thanks!!
Reply With Quote
  #37  
07-03-2002, 08:25 AM
bman bman is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 356
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ANDREAS
Hello every one,

this matrix have a history. First, the matrix is develop for a MPEG2 video stream for a standard SVCD an ~120min with 2pass on 2cds. Second, the old TMPEG versions have many problems with the B-frames. From the second B-frames the encoder had not enougth bitrate for the other B-frames. The 99 is only to save blockness in the movie. Detail and motion are not so good. My tests (renew article ) have shown, that the 99 Matrix is not so good for ths KVCD. I take only the standard matrix from TMPEG and if I test other solutions I have only develop a new matix for 448 x 320 and 320 x 432 motion area. For the new generation of TMPEG 2.54 and higher I thing we have develop a new solution for the MPEG2 standard SVCD.

I have encode my first whole movie. It is "rush hour 2" in PAL with 84min playing time. The result is :

CQ68, min 650kbps, max 2550kbps, P and B frame with 0

In the first step I used virtual dub with filter and frame server and secound TMPEG CQ. The amount of the file is 832000 MB by 126795 frames. The quality is better as a VHS tape but a little bit more worse then a very good S-VHS tape (copied from DVD PAL with an macrovisionsdecoder to a very good S-VHS video-tape recorder).

ANDREAS
Hi Andreas !
Welcome !
I would to ask u to help me to make clear how exectly matrix is working ?
If he affects only quality or file size too ?
When u are talking about resolutions and matrix performanses for them
I would like to understand better what u mean .
I just don't have needed background to make this clear for me .
If u can give me any link with good explanation will be great !
bman
Reply With Quote
  #38  
07-03-2002, 09:28 AM
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
Quote:
Originally Posted by energy80s
Kwag I still use the original KVCD template as I think it gives better quality than any of the later versions. I have never seen this "flashing" that you describe. Is it very noticable?
Yes it is!. In the sample I had from "Under Siege 2", it was very visible.
It all depends on the movie and the scene.

kwag
OK, I'll try it with the "48" instead of "0" and see if it makes any difference. Just encoded Jewel Of The Nile from a noisy DVD (glad I didn't buy it!!) with a CQ of 66 and the file size was 760Mb. Am about to encode Romancing The Stone (from a similar noisy DVD). As they are both the same running time (101 mins) I will see if this change will affect the final file size or not. As long as it is under 795 mgs NERO will burn it OK.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
07-03-2002, 09:42 AM
ANDREAS ANDREAS is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
@bman

well the matrix. The matrix is most of the complicated things in an encoder. On whitch way they are working (intra and non-intra matrix) is the know how and secret of the developper from the encoder. We understand the whole theme in this time not 100% exactly. At this http://tan.informatik.tu-chemnitz.de...mpeg_tech.html and this http://www.kom.e-technik.tu-darmstad...cs/basics.html Link you have a very good overview about MPEG codiering. Go on a searching mashine and tipe "intra matrix, non-intra matix, mpeg, DCT and iDCT". With this words you found a lot of informations in the net. If you speak german you can visit this site http://www.edv-tipp.de/gastbeitraege/kika001_dct.htm. It is an artikel about intra matrix from one of our mods.

ANDREAS

addition:
http://viswiz.gmd.de/DVP/Public/deli...g/hi_str01.htm
__________________
DVD-SVCD-FORUM.de
Reply With Quote
  #40  
07-03-2002, 10:16 AM
bman bman is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 356
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ANDREAS
@bman

well the matrix. The matrix is most of the complicated things in an encoder. On whitch way they are working (intra and non-intra matrix) is the know how and secret of the developper from the encoder. We understand the whole theme in this time not 100% exactly. At this http://tan.informatik.tu-chemnitz.de...mpeg_tech.html and this http://www.kom.e-technik.tu-darmstad...cs/basics.html Link you have a very good overview about MPEG codiering. Go on a searching mashine and tipe "intra matrix, non-intra matix, mpeg, DCT and iDCT". With this words you found a lot of informations in the net. If you speak german you can visit this site http://www.edv-tipp.de/gastbeitraege/kika001_dct.htm. It is an artikel about intra matrix from one of our mods.

ANDREAS

addition:
http://viswiz.gmd.de/DVP/Public/deli...g/hi_str01.htm
@ Andreas again !
THX for so quick replay !
I'll check all those links and hope it'll help me to acheve some knowledge
in this complicated theme .
THX again and I'm really glad u joined us !
bman
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which KVCD/SKVCD TMPGenc Template to use? JoJoFunyan Video Encoding and Conversion 2 08-03-2004 03:37 PM
TMPGEnc: Kvcd template with audio ShortyII Video Encoding and Conversion 4 03-04-2004 04:17 AM
TMPGEnc: Which is the best KVCD template? Maverick Video Encoding and Conversion 1 02-28-2004 11:27 AM
KVCD: TMPGenc Still Crashes when using Template with Audio? Morloc Video Encoding and Conversion 3 03-02-2003 01:15 AM
default tmpgenc template or the skvcd template? andybno1 Video Encoding and Conversion 4 08-23-2002 12:24 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:34 PM  —  vBulletin Đ Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd