Quantcast FFmpeg: Curious about H.263 in FFvfw - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #1  
02-19-2004, 04:20 PM
poerschr poerschr is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
marcellus stated:
Quote:
Did you tried H.263 quantizing method with your big resolution encodings? Because for me gave the best results.
Kwag responded:
Quote:
That's because the stream it made, it's a standard IBBP mpeg stream
There's no standalone that will play an H.263 stream.
marcellus then asked:
Quote:
But again, DID YOU tried that option? Because all I can understand from your answer is:
-you didn't try it because you don' believe will give anything useful and think you would just waste your time OR
-you did try it but it's simply encoding the "old" mpeg way with standard mpeg matrix, so that option there is basically doing nothing, just taking up space, so you wasted your time already

marcellus reported some positive effects being produced by using H.263. I don't think that you can deny that it must have some effect one the stream, why else would marcellus report that it did?

I am curious if Kwag (or anyone else) has tested this...

Thank You....

[/quote]
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  
02-19-2004, 04:34 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I don't get why people post something like this...

If you really are curious, why don't you test it yourself then??
There's no way that ffvfw will create that H.263...
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #3  
02-19-2004, 04:40 PM
Dialhot Dialhot is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,463
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
That's EXACTLY what I thought before I saw you already answered that.

What is the purpose of post like "did someone try ?" "I'm curious about..."
Who do you thing we are ? Your servants doing dirty works for you to enjoy the results ?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
02-19-2004, 05:03 PM
poerschr poerschr is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The conversation in the forum was left open ended, I am curious if anyone experimented with this setting yet. A simple "no I have not" would of sufficed...The servant thing is taking it WAY to far...

Quote:
There's no way that ffvfw will create that H.263...
Obviously, marcellus has been using it for quite some time...Either the program simply rejects the H.263 and uses the traditional setting, or making the traditional setting is some how incorporated into H.263...
Reply With Quote
  #5  
02-19-2004, 07:14 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
@poerschr,

If you READ the H.263 specifications, you'll understand WHY an H.263 stream can't play on WMP, WinDVD, PowerDVD, or on your standalone player.
So really, there's no sense for me (or anyone!) to test it.
If marcellus was able to play it, it was because he created a standard MPEG stream. Not a H.263 stream.

Edit: And yes, I did test it just for the hell of it and to satisfy my curiosity, and verified that the produced MPEG stream is identical, viewed on Bitrate Viewer. So even if you set to encode as H.263, you're still encoding MPEG.

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #6  
02-19-2004, 08:10 PM
poerschr poerschr is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks kwag...I just wanted to make sure that H.263 was not in some way influencing the mpeg stream.....


I understand now why you are truly the master of this site...I appreciate your direct answers to my questions...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
02-24-2004, 05:00 PM
marcellus marcellus is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bucharest, Romania, GMT+2h
Posts: 73
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm sorry that I react so slowly, but in my rush and lazyness I didn't read this thread at his time.
So:
Quote:
Originally Posted by poerschr
The conversation in the forum was left open ended, I am curious if anyone experimented with this setting yet.
Thats true, Kwag didn't bother to answer me and I got tired to ask again. Even though he somehow answered in this thread he is doing it in an unsatisfactory way for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwag
If you READ the H.263 specifications, you'll understand WHY an H.263 stream can't play on WMP, WinDVD, PowerDVD, or on your standalone player.
Well, I never talked about a H.263 stream, but about the H.263 quantization method. I asked Kwag to try it because in my opinion with FFVFW the quality, (at 352x288, PAL, low bittates) is as follows:
Mpeg standard matrix<Mpeg Kwag's matrix<Mpeg H.263 method
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwag
Edit: And yes, I did test it just for the hell of it and to satisfy my curiosity, and verified that the produced MPEG stream is identical, viewed on Bitrate Viewer. So even if you set to encode as H.263, you're still encoding MPEG.
Since when the bitrate viewer could say anything about visual quality? And again, I always been sure that you'll obtain a mpeg stream, playable on a dvd-player, but quantized with H.263 method, not a H.263 stream. I don't know what part of this encoding standard could apply to mpeg encoding, but that's about the magic ffvfw does, since it beats at quality any other mpeg2 encoder known to me.
Marcellus
Reply With Quote
  #8  
02-24-2004, 05:43 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 marcellus,

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcellus
Since when the bitrate viewer could say anything about visual quality?
When the one encoded as H.263 and the one encoded as MPEG produce identical foot prints. That's what I verified, and the result of both samples was a mirror image one from the other. There's no difference. File size, average bitrate, GOP pattern. Everything was the same.

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #9  
02-24-2004, 06:02 PM
marcellus marcellus is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bucharest, Romania, GMT+2h
Posts: 73
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Ok, to cut it short let's say that H.263 setting has a placebo effect on me
You still didn't check it visually but let's drop the issue because it starts to be boring

Best regards
marcellus
Reply With Quote
  #10  
02-25-2004, 06:13 PM
Dano Dano is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Brockton, MA
Posts: 134
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The quantization type in ffvfw, h.263 vs. mpeg, defines the default quantization matrix.
__________________
-Dano
Reply With Quote
  #11  
02-25-2004, 06:22 PM
bilu bilu is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 341
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
But is it possible to test the H.263 matrix in MPEG-2?
In MPEG-4 it's really good for anime, avoid blocks on edges, but also cleans the image a bit too much.

I'd like to see how it compares to the Notch matrix if possible

Bilu
Reply With Quote
  #12  
02-25-2004, 06:27 PM
Dano Dano is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Brockton, MA
Posts: 134
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Selecting h.263 does nothing but select the default mpeg4 matrix, this does not mean it cannot be used for mpeg1/2 as well.
__________________
-Dano
Reply With Quote
  #13  
02-25-2004, 06:35 PM
bilu bilu is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 341
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I know, but I'd like to see feedback from others.

I'm setting up my first MPEG-2 encoding stuff and I'm on a mencoder phase right now


Bilu
Reply With Quote
  #14  
02-25-2004, 07:03 PM
marcellus marcellus is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bucharest, Romania, GMT+2h
Posts: 73
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi bilu!
Well, if you ask me I'd say that I get better results with H.263. If you ask kwag or jellygoose they will say that with H.263 you will obtain the same result as with standard mpeg matrix. I dropped dead this issue since I'm not 100% sure that what I see isn't a placebo effect, I have to do some more testings. Untill then I have to keep my opinions to myself.
Happy encodings anyway
marcellus
Reply With Quote
  #15  
02-25-2004, 07:54 PM
bilu bilu is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 341
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
@marcellus

Maybe you ALL are right !!!

From mencoder docs (also libavcodec based):
http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=64535#64535

Maybe H.263 matrix is the default in FFVFW too
Please try forcing MPEG matrix to see if there are differences.

Bilu
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FFMPEG vs FFVFW vs Mencoder ? bilu Video Encoding and Conversion 561 04-15-2004 06:16 AM
FFMPEG: Using FFVFW from command-line vmesquita Video Encoding and Conversion 1 03-29-2004 07:05 PM
FFMPEG: Observation about ffvfw poerschr Video Encoding and Conversion 28 02-24-2004 05:50 PM
FFMPEG: Do ffvfw and mencoder/ffmpeg give the same results? Razorblade2000 Video Encoding and Conversion 4 02-06-2004 04:23 PM
FFMPEG: XMPEG 5.03 and ffvfw kwag Video Encoding and Conversion 2 02-05-2004 10:57 AM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:37 AM  —  vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd