Verdict on 528x480: CQ mode essentially the same as CQ_VBR (perhaps with less Gibbs and a tiny bit blockier), except for very fast motion, where CQ mode is vastly superior.
Now testing 352x480. |
Here's an illustration of the problem I was talking about earlier wrt 352x480. It's not as bad this time (probably because I used "high quality" motion searching), but you can clearly see a difference in the area I highlighted. In the CQ_VBR version, the blocks are there but are sort of "rounded" and are less regular and defined than in the CQ version. It doesn't look too bad in the screenshot, but when it's moving there's a very noticible difference in blockiness between the two. I also find the CQ version a bit blurry.
http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/error.gif I think I take from this test that -- at least with this fast-action, low-luma material -- CQ mode is suitable for 528x480 and 704x480 but not for 352x480. The same probably applies for 352x240. |
Quote:
Could you make one more test from that clip, but use a higher MIN value. Maybe 600 :idea: Maybe CQ doesn't respect MIN as much as CQ_VBR, and that's the reason for the higher blockiness. Just something that poped in my mind right now :roll: -kwag |
Quote:
And now we're going to a neighbour's house for a few drinks. I'll probably pop back on when I get back to see if there's any more developments, but I don't expect I'll be doing any more testing until the 27th when we get back from visiting parents-in-law 8O. |
The way I see it is that CQ is allocating more bits on high frequency components, and that's why we see less artifacts. Then maybe on "not so long" movies, we have an advantage with CQ, and longer movies CQ_VBR wins. Maybe it's not resolution related. Maybe Quantization Matrix related :?: . The KVCD Q. Matrix was heavily tested on CQ_VBR, not on CQ :roll: :idea:
-kwag |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
That's not to say that each template/resolution couldn't have a different VBR method and Q matrix... 8O Either that or I've had too many beers 8). |
Hehe :D
I think the best thing to do is to "Revisit the matrix" Not "The Matrix Revisited" 8O :mrgreen: It would be a pain to have different GOPs and matrices for different resolutions. I'd hang myself :lol: No, you haven't had enough beers yet :wink: -kwag |
I figured I'd post this in here since everyone is following it ;).
We'll be leaving tomorrow about 8:30am to visit my parents-in-law for Christmas, so I won't be back at the testing until the 27th or 28th. Hope you all have a good Christmas and many advances are made in my absence. I expect to find you all fitting Saving Private Ryan onto one disc at 704x480 by the time I get back :mrgreen:. |
Quote:
Merry Christmas to you and your family. Over here in Puerto Rico, we're all having fun eating "Lechon Asado" (Roasted Pig. Mmmm! ), Morcillas ( You don't want to know!, something from the insides of the pig ), "Guineitos fritos" ( Sort of cooked bananas in vinager and olive oil, onions, etc ), "Arroz con gandules" ( Rice and a kind of bean ), Rum and lots Beer, and I feel like a pig :mrgreen: Later!, -kwag |
Quote:
Sounds absolutely delicious (don't worry about morcillas -- I've been known to eat haggis in the past ;)). I wish I could look forward to such eating instead of turkey! :) |
HI guys! 8O
wow, now this threat has made some progresses since yesterday. I'm pretty sure we found something of interest here... I made several more tests, and here are my results... I don't have a space to upload the samples yet :? but that will surely follow... Sample #1: KVCDx2 704x576 PLUS w/ KWAG Matrix @ CQ_VBR 5.8 --- 11,374 KB --- Average Q-Level : 6.55 Q-Peak : 19.2 !! Sample#2: KVCDx2 704x576 PLUS w/ Default Matrix @ CQ_VBR 5.8 --- 11,371 KB --- Average Q-Level : 7.09 Q-Peak : 20.24 !! Sample#3: KVCDx2 704x576 w/ Default Matrix @ CQ 57 --- 11,391 KB --- Average Q-Level : 5.28 Q-Peak : 5.64 !! Sample#4: KVCDx2 704x576 w/ KWAG Matrix @ CQ 61 !!! --- 11,416 KB --- Average Q-Level : 4.62 Q-Peak : 4.80 !!! Conclusion: CQ Mode beats the s### out of CQ_VBR regarding the Q-Level. Overall performance looks better too. Using KWAG Matrix w/ CQ Mode gives me the oppurtunity to increase CQ Level somehow... I'm sure there is a more optimized Matrix for CQ mode too, so that those blocks disappear in low bitrate areas... :D Hehe kwag... we struck on gold again here... as far as i can see... |
Right Now I am ripping the first DVD of LOTR Special Extended edition... I want to fit the whole movie on 2 CDs using 528x576 resolution with the Kwag Matrix and CQ mode...
I'll let you know about the results |
ok, I did my first samples of Lord Of The Rings Estended Edition.
This is what the first DVD of this beast will look like on ONE CD-R!! I don't know why I can't upload them right now, but I've some problems... Will do that later! Sample#1 : --- 11,941 KB --- 528x576 CQ Mode 71,25 w/ KVCDx2 Matrix... Avg. Q: 2.64 Peak: 2.72 Sample#2 : --- 12,002 KB --- 704x576 CQ Mode 63 w/ KVCDx2 Matrix... Avg. Q: 4.29 Peak: 4.44 Both Samples look great in my eyes... Is there any difference between the KVCDx2_PLUS Matrix and the KVCDx3 Matrix?? |
:lol: I kinda miss the enthusiasm about this right now... no replies since this morning... Well I guess everybody's filled up with turkey and sleeping in his TV Chair... :wink:
C'mon kwag get up! :o there's work to do here, remember SansGrip wants Saving Private Ryan in 704x480 DVD quality on a single floppy disc :D |
Quote:
-kwag |
Let's see some samples Jellygoose :D :twisted:
-kwag |
sorry about this taking so long... I just signed up for lycos webspace, but they somehow need alot of time to activate the account... I'll post the links here as soon as i uploaded the samples...
|
Hi Kwag,
Great News!!! :D File prediction seems to still be accurate using CQ and new GOP. I tested Vanilla Sky, 8161 seconds, 195,684 frames, at CQ=55, and audio = 64kb, for 1 CD. The test result was 732,142,261 and the actual video encode file size is 726,994,559. WOW 8O That's very close for accuracy. This movie took ~12hrs with the following script: LoadPlugin("E:\DVD Backup\2 - DVD2SVCD\MPEG2DEC\MPEG2DEC.dll") LoadPlugin("E:\DVD Backup\2 - DVD2SVCD\BlockBuster\BlockBuster.dll") LoadPlugin("E:\DVD Backup\2 - DVD2SVCD\LegalClip\LegalClip.dll") LoadPlugin("E:\DVD Backup\2 - DVD2SVCD\Sampler\Sampler.dll") mpeg2source("D:\Temp\movie.d2v") LegalClip() BilinearResize(672,352,10,0,700,480) #BlockBuster(method="noise", variance=.5, seed=1 ) TemporalSmoother(1,2) AddBorders(16,64,16,64) LegalClip() Fast search was used in Tmpgenc. The movie quality is excellent, but there are noticable Gibbs noise around people and objects both near and in the background. This a distinct improvement over CQ_VBR. :D Also, note that Blockbuster's noise is commented and TS(1,2) was added for compression. I have never gotten a 704x480, 136 minute movie on 1 CD with good quality. 8O I think your on to something big :mrgreen: -black prince |
Hi black prince,
You might want to add the Blockbuster "Noise" line back, but this time with a lower variance ( .3 to .4 ) :wink: Also you might want to play with the detail_min and detail_max values. :wink: :wink: I'm pretty sure we're all switching to CQ after we fully optimize the low frequency stuff :wink: :wink: :wink: -kwag |
great... here's the sample from LOTR 528x576 resolution. I'm currently encoding that one, and the sample looks promising.
See for yourself http://mitglied.lycos.de/catch22tx20...576cq72.28.m1v that first DVD of the movie is gonna fit on one CDR with a 128kb audio track... it's 103 mins long... :wink: (sorry about the 10MB file... hope ya'll have a good connection over there! ) |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.