@SansGrip,
I tried 2 CD encodes with CQ and CQ_VBR. Flashing still remains a problem, but Gibbs is much better :) I also, tried your method of manual file prediction: ((CD size - Audio) / Total Frames) * test frames) = Target File Size It's slightly more accurate, but I was wondering how you determined for 1 CD the capacity is 813,019,155. For 2 CD's would it be correct to multiply by 2. :?: -black prince |
@Kwag,
It looked bad on TV and PC. (flashing with 704x480 CQ). Also, 528x480 was a little better, but it's still noticalbe. Not until I used 352x240 did flashing disappear, but Gibbs seemed a little worst. :) Seemed the higher the resolution flashing was more noticable :) -black prince |
Ok, you guys push me, so I'm going to look at this very closely :D
I'm going to go grab something to eat, and I'll be back in a couple of hours ( wife wants to go out :x ). I have something in my mind that might solve the problem. Later :wink: , -kwag |
Quote:
Capacity of CD in bytes = minutes * 60 * 75 * 2324 For an 80-minute CD, that would be: 80 * 60 * 75 * 2324 = 836,640,000 A good guess for VCD/SVCD filesystem overhead is 11mb, or 11,534,336. This brings us down to: 836,640,000 - 11,534,336 = 825,105,664 We then need to compensate for the system stream, which is calculated using the following formula: Total size = (video size + audio size) * (2048 / 2018) Therefore we do: 825,105,664 * (2018 / 2048) = 813,019,155 That's the total number of bytes we have available for our video and audio. Once we subtract the size of our audio from that, we have the maximum size for video. Quote:
1,673,280,000 - 22 * 1024 * 1024 = 1,673,280,000 - 23,068,672 = 1,650,211,328 1,650,211,328 * (2018 / 2048) = 1,626,038,310 and 813,019,155 * 2 = 1,626,038,310 In other words, "yep" :mrgreen:. |
@SansGrip,
SansGrip wrote: Quote:
-black prince |
@black prince
By the way, that's the formula I'm going to be using in the next release of KVCDP... It does seem to be more accurate, as you say, but it's a bit of a pain doing it manually. |
@black prince, jorel, SansGrip, and All@,
Download this, and tell me if the "flashing" effect is gone or not. 8O http://www.kvcd.net/kpax-1-12-4-1-16.mpg 8O Is the quality retained :?: ( To me, it seems the same ) Is the flashing gone :?: ( To me, yes, gone for good! ) But I need more eyes to look at it 8) If it is, I'll explain what it means, and why ( I assume you already see what ) :wink: Compare it to the sample I posted yesterday -kwag |
Quote:
amazing 8O can't see any problem! 8) (perfect color cubs,skin faces..... :wink: ) see in zoomplayer too,a little dark and some blocks in dark! :? |
Expect more changes tonight on the GOP. My goal is to find an optimal value to match the quality of the 1-12-1-1-24 at the same file size. This thread will be polluted by me with samples. 8O But when I put my mind on something, I "sock it to it" until I get what I want :D
So stay tunned, and compare the samples I'll start to post until we all agree that it matches the "Almost Gibbs free" kpax-newgop-newmat.mpg sample, but better stable background without flashes. This is the reference sample and size that I am focusing on right now. -kwag |
Quote:
|
Tunning, tunning..... 8)
-kwag |
Quote:
(I just realized... The more time you spend doing this, the less time you spend playing with GripFit 8O ;)) |
Quote:
Those flashes are (were) really annoying. :wink: |
Quote:
Original reference: http://www.kvcd.net/kpax-newgop-newmat.mpg New test model: http://www.kvcd.net/kpax-1-24-4-1.24.mpg Quote:
-kwag |
Need some testers here :wink:
Encode a sample ( 15 second or so ) with GOP 1-12-1-1-24 and another sample of the same 15 second clip with GOP 1-24-4-1-24. Play with CQ of second sample until size matches size of first sample. Then make a visual comparison. Use KVCD BETA-1a Notch Matrix for both. -kwag |
@Kwag,
I created two 30 second samples. One with the GOP 1-12-1-1-24 and the other using 1-24-4-1-24. I used file predictor to create the second file by setting the target file size to the size of the first test file. I agree with SansGrip, that the flashing is much improved. It appeared to be there but much less noticable. I viewed the samples up close on my PC and TV. Up close, meaning, within one foot. From 5+ feet, It's not noticable. There was some Gibbs, but maybe your CQ settings were not very high. I realize that flashing can not be completely eliminated, but if it reduced to a point where it's not noticable that'ss just as good. :D -black prince |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I can't see flashing anymore on that scene 8O. At least on that last sample I posted. I'll encode something else. As far as Gibbs, they're actually there, but they're "smoothed" because of the additional B frames, so they don't show as sharp as with 1-12-1-1-24. -kwag |
@Kwag,
Without realizing it, you are using psychovisual techniques. Reducing picture effects the are very noticable and enhancing those the vision focuses on more often. It's like listening to music and realizing the audio range of the ear will never notice certain imperfections and others it will pick very quickly. Knownig which visual effects are ignored and which are very accute to sight is useful to creating high quality video with greater compression. I think it's really interesting and fun tweaking this process towards that goal. :D -black prince |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
-kwag |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.