digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]

digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives] (http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/)
-   Video Encoding and Conversion (http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/encode/)
-   -   KVCD new beta template - user experiences, tweaks and hacks? (http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/encode/594-kvcd-beta-template.html)

kwag 07-09-2002 02:57 PM

KVCD new beta template - user experiences, tweaks and hacks?
 
I posted this on another topic, but it should go here. Please write your experiences and comments regarding the new templates.

"The Matrix" done with the 704x480 beta template.
The complete 136 minute movie. The video stream size is 1,302,091KB + 224,000KB audio stream. So that muxes perfectly with room to spare in two 80 minute CD's. So the 704x480 should fit just about any 120 minute ( wide screen + IVTC ) in 2 CD.s Quality? well, you decide :lol:
Sample here: http://ns1.shidima.com/kwag/matrix-704x480.mpg ( soundless )

kwag

TKS 07-09-2002 03:22 PM

hmm
 
I did Cheech and Chong's Still Smokin' at the default 704-480 and it came in at about 1.03 gigs with sound...

BTW kwag thanks for refering me to headAC3HE... wicked sound

tks


Oh the movie was about 93 mins long

kwag 07-09-2002 04:03 PM

Proof of Life
 
I was encoding "Proof of Life", and had to stop the encode, because of low memory in the machine I was using. The movie had encoded 45% and the file size was 597,764KB ( video stream ) with the 704x480 template.
So I guess this will fit perfectly in 2 CD's. I'll start the encode again later.

kwag

Daagar 07-09-2002 04:18 PM

As I mentioned in the other thread, DivX movies tend to become quite large with the new template (which is understandable, since blocks in the DivX source won't encode nicely). However, my question relates to how much you can alter the CQ value before getting huge quality dropoffs. With the old templates, for example, anything below about CQ 50 would have a VERY sharp quality dropoff. Since the CQ is so low already in the new templates, can they go down much to get better size? My thinking is that since DivX is a noisy/blocky source to begin with, cutting back on the CQ won't degrade quality _too_ much since the quality isn't there to begin with ;) But if there is a sharp dropoff point, I'd prefer to stay above it. (Focused mainly on the 353x480 templates).

kwag 07-09-2002 05:07 PM

Encoding guidelines for lower file size with new templates.
 
@Daagar and All:

The best way is to encode some small 15 second samples. Note the file size. Then just start lowering the quality value and encode small clips until you don't like the quality anymore. The new templates are optimized for the best possible quality while maintaining the lowest possible file size. But you can go way lower, without any quality difference, viewed in a regular TV. When I say regular, I mean not HDTV's. You could drop the quality value until your file size is about 25% to 35% smaller than with the default values, and even on a large 38" CRT television, you won't be able to tell the difference. On a HDTV, you will!

As an example, we have an old ( 4 years ) 60" rear screen projection TV, and the 704x480 look about the same as the 352x480. Because it's not high definition. Even the 352x240 looks great. So you can easily drop your quality to a file size around 30% smaller, and still enjoy an excelent picture.

Here are some numbers to be used as guidelines, so try them out. They should give you no visual difference in a regular TV than with the default values set in the new templates.

For the 704x480, change the quality value from 15 to 7.5. This will drop the total file size between 25% to 30%.
For the 352x480, change the quality value from 20 to 10. This will drop the total file size between 30% to 35%.
And for the 352x240, dont touch it!. It's not worth lowering the quality, because it should already fit almost every 120 minute movie as it is.

I hope these numbers work for you, as they have worked for me.

kwag

dr_nicotine 07-09-2002 05:50 PM

New Template tried in PAL 352x288
 
I've changed the framerate to 25fps and the size to 352x288 from the 352x240 NTSC template (352x288 has the best compatibility between me and some of my friends).

I also changed the Aspect ratio to 16:9 (I've always done that with the old templates too, because I want to use as many lines as possible to somewhat compensate for the small size).

I've tried two movies, and both of them had almost optimal sizes after 1 try:

American Pie ( 91'47 ) : 786 Mb
She's All That: ( 91'38 ) : 788 Mb
(I've always kept liking teen movies... 8))

I'd just done American Pie with the old template, and the quality of the new template was definitely a lot better.

I hope to try a more chalenging movie soon, to see what CQ-VBR rate I would need for longer or more active movies.

Hopefully some other PAL-viewers can do something with this info.

pacodoni 07-09-2002 09:47 PM

Hi KWag !!!! :)

Wonderful work on the new temp, the quality is pretty amazing, 8O

Just for make sure, check this out :

Ive encoded rush hour with the new template( 352X240 )as it is.
98 mins of movie - filesize about 685 megs...

Is that correct, i mean, is acceptable the filesize-movie lenght aspects.

Just to have a notion, cos i have no much knowledge about the VBR CQ :oops:

Thanks :wink:

Pacodoni 8)

kwag 07-09-2002 09:55 PM

HI Pacodoni:

Yeah, that should be about right. Figure around 200MB average per every half hour on action movies for the 352x240 template. So you're in range. And that's a pretty active movie 8O so you got a great size.

Any macro blocks showing with the new Q. Matrix ?? 8)

kwag

Bud 07-09-2002 10:48 PM

New Templates
 
Kwag,

Just completed and old classics from original DVD rip, Dirty Harry, 103 Min, I lowered the 352x480 CQ_VRB to 10 just to see what it would look like, the file size was 517,022. Played back on my Panasonic E20, Pioneer DV 343, Panasonic LV55, GREAT!. Now I will up it to 15 to see how that plays out. Another great job Kwag. Will post later

Aloha
Bud

Daagar 07-09-2002 10:59 PM

This posting was retracted by the author.

syk2c11 07-10-2002 01:45 AM

Question about muxing:

(1)---When muxing video and audio streams with bbmpeg, where is the option to set the range if it is to be put onto 2 CDs, or it should be muxed the streams in a whole and use Tmpeg to cut into 2 mpeg files?

kwag 07-10-2002 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by syk2c11
Question about muxing:

(1)---When muxing video and audio streams with bbmpeg, where is the option to set the range if it is to be put onto 2 CDs, or it should be muxed the streams in a whole and use Tmpeg to cut into 2 mpeg files?

When you run BBmpeg, go to the "Start encoding/Settings/General Settings", and you'll see at the bottom "Multiplexing/start/stop/size options:" There you enter Start seconds, End seconds and max size in MB.

kwag

kwag 07-10-2002 03:23 AM

Proof of Life
 
Here's the result. CD#1=793,579KB and CD#2=769,290KB with the beta 704x480 template. Audio encoded at 224Khz Dolby Surround :lol:
Movie running time is 135 minutes and 33 seconds.
kwag

Daagar 07-10-2002 08:00 AM

I retract my earlier statement about the new templates causing heavy mosquito effect. I redid my clip with the orig. KVCD template, and saw the same artifacts - thus the source simply isn't as clean as it appears to be and it is hard to encode. In fact, because the quality of the new method is so much higher, it may be slightly exaggerating the faults.

Sidenote: Has anyone requested support for CQ_VBR mode in DVD2SVCD? It would pretty much automate the whole process for everyone.

pacodoni 07-10-2002 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwag
HI Pacodoni:

Yeah, that should be about right. Figure around 200MB average per every half hour on action movies for the 352x240 template. So you're in range. And that's a pretty active movie 8O so you got a great size.

Any macro blocks showing with the new Q. Matrix ?? 8)

kwag

Great, so i will try another movies using the beta...

About the macro, i get only a little bit on the start of the movie, but lets see all the problems on this scene...

1) Night scene
2) Steam on the dock where the movie was made
3) Use 1+2 and put in an high action ( of course, if it is jackie chan :lol: ) scene.

But, i made a test with this an the old template, and the old got much more macros, so, thats the right way...

Thanks again Kwag :wink:

Pacodoni 8)

Yoda 07-10-2002 12:06 PM

Quote:

Here's the result. CD#1=793,579KB and CD#2=769,290KB with the beta 704x480 template. Audio encoded at full 224Khz Dolby Surround
Movie running time is 135 minutes and 33 seconds.
kwag
Kwag,
I'm going to be encoding the same movie today. Did you use FitCd on this one? I read in another post from you that said you just use DVD2AVI, then Tmpgenc the video only and remux with bbmpeg after using Headac3ech on the audio. Also can you explain the difference in quality on the HDTV. Is that why you are using 704x480?

a_star62 07-10-2002 02:01 PM

Re: KVCD new beta template users experiences, tweaks and hac
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kwag
I posted this on another topic, but it should go here. Please write your experiences and comments regarding the new templates.

"The Matrix" done with the 704x480 beta template.
The complete 136 minute movie. The video stream size is 1,302,091KB + 224,000KB audio stream. So that muxes perfectly with room to spare in two 80 minute CD's. So the 704x480 should fit just about any 120 minute ( wide screen + IVTC ) in 2 CD.s Quality? well, you decide :lol:
Sample here: http://ns1.shidima.com/kwag/matrix-704x480.mpg ( soundless )

kwag

kwag,
you say that you use IVTC in your encodes. I have been trying to do this for awhile but I cannot get it to work. I finally found that If I encode with MPEG-2 and a 23.976 fps source, check 3:2 pulldown when playback and encode. It works perfectly. For IVTC, does the source have to be 23 fps or 29? It wopuld be great if we could get a good guide to help us do this becuase some movies are a b*tch to encode. Thanks kwag. GREAT WORK!

A-Star

rendalunit 07-10-2002 02:27 PM

I did "the Mothman Prophecies" (119 min)- 911.433 mb
"a beautiful mind" (136 min) 1.224 gb <- both minus the sound

These templates are by far the best yet- I did not see any blocks or artifacts at all in either movie. With the kvcdx2-1cd temp I occasionally see blocks in dark scenes on my 27" tv.

Great job Kwag!

@Star, source must be 29.97fps FILM to inverse telecine (IVTC)

Yoda 07-10-2002 02:39 PM

rendalunit!
I'm not getting any where close to those file sizes. did you use the 704x480 template or the 352x480.

@kwag
Tryed to encode "Proof of Life" at 704x480 and the video alone came to 1.6 gb. I'm just putting the .d2v file in and using the beta 704x480 template with cq15. Any ideas?

rendalunit 07-10-2002 02:48 PM

hi Yoda,

I used the 704x480 beta template. The file sizes are without sound-> mp2 added another 2-3 hundred mb. ARe your file sizes much larger or smaller than the 800mb-1.2gb ballpark?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:32 PM  —  vBulletin Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd

Site design, images and content © 2002-2021 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2021 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.