Quantcast CQ vs. CQ_VBR ... Very Interesting... - Page 30 - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #581  
01-14-2003, 02:04 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
SansGrip,

Finished "The Green Mile". The predicted file size was 595,860KB and the final size is 578,176KB. So 595,860 * 0.98 = 583,942.8 which is very close to the final size.

-kwag
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
  #582  
01-14-2003, 02:09 PM
SansGrip SansGrip is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,135
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
The predicted file size was 595,860KB and the final size is 578,176KB. So 595,860 * 0.98 = 583,942.8 which is very close to the final size.
595,860 * 0.97 = 577,984.2 which is even closer . It's a little below the final size, but a megabyte either way is well within reason -- even if it won't quite fit, a small overburn is usually not a problem. Signs will be finished in 1h17m...
Reply With Quote
  #583  
01-14-2003, 02:22 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 SansGrip
595,860 * 0.97 = 577,984.2 which is even closer . It's a little below the final size, but a megabyte either way is well within reason -- even if it won't quite fit, a small overburn is usually not a problem.
Ok, just double check that your ((SampleSize * 60 ) * .97 ) hits around the same diff. ( * 60 If you encoded at 23.976)
Quote:
Signs will be finished in 1h17m...
Unless Murphy strikes
Reply With Quote
  #584  
01-14-2003, 02:42 PM
Daagar Daagar is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 158
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SansGrip

Force FILM mode is great if the movie is 100% telecined, but I often find some interlaced material creeps in there too (especially during special effects or when there are captions on the screen). This can produce noticible interlacing artifacts in the final encode. Telecide will catch those strays and deinterlace them.

The disadvantage is that Telecide is quite slow: my encode times drop from on average ~3.5 hours to ~5 hours. I do think it's worth it though.
Is it safe to _always_ use telecide/decimate in place of Force FILM? I've read you can do Telecide(Post=??) to speed up that operation (though it may defeat the purpose of using it... will have to go back and read the docs again for it).

If telecide/decimate is always safe to use, one less thing I have to remember when using dvd2avi
Reply With Quote
  #585  
01-14-2003, 02:51 PM
SansGrip SansGrip is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,135
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daagar
Is it safe to _always_ use telecide/decimate in place of Force FILM?
I don't see why not, as long as the material is telecined. You wouldn't want to use it on real 29.97fps interlaced material .

Quote:
one less thing I have to remember when using dvd2avi
Ah, you still have to remember to make sure that option's unchecked -- DVD2AVI has a habit of randomly changing settings between invocations, at least on my system .
Reply With Quote
  #586  
01-14-2003, 03:32 PM
Daagar Daagar is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 158
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
SansGrip,
Since you are master of the filters, I'm curious on your opinions on filter usage when going from SVCD -> KVCD. Your Signs sample looks excellent, but I'm curious if such smoothing would help or hinder on a source that has already been processed. Even without TemporalSoften()/Cnr2() in the equation... is Blockbuster noise still appropriate (var=.3)? FluxSmooth()? Anything else not normally needed with DVD->KVCD processing?

I know, I know, I need to go do some testing myself. Lack of time plus slow CPU makes that a long process. Much quicker to hit 'Refresh' on this thread
Reply With Quote
  #587  
01-14-2003, 03:53 PM
m0rdant m0rdant is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 137
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by pacodoni

I gave it a try cos i have a brother with a Pioneer DV-525, that doesn't handle 352X480 or 528x480.

Pacodoni
For Pioneer players you can try encoding in mpeg 1 as usual (352x480, 528x480) but burn the mpeg 1 file as an SVCD with VCDeasy. I've had good results doing this with my 343.
Reply With Quote
  #588  
01-14-2003, 04:11 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
Sansgrip Wrote :

Quote:
I think you'll find that the audio sounds just fine at 112kbps if you resample to 44.1khz (there are noticible artifacts at that bitrate if you leave it at 48khz). That gives you a bit more room for video. I recommend using HeadAC3he for audio encoding.

Yeah, i've been sailing trough these waters a time ago
No, seriously, i tried the sound in 64, 80, 96, 112, in the kvcd LBR, when kwag put it on the oven by the first time.
I totally agree with you, 112 it's just like 128, i do my VCD-MP3 with 112, so it can fit more music on a 80 min CD.
I've just used 128 cos i was wondering if the DTX from episode 2 DVD would get better somehow, but it didn't.

I think you'll find that the audio sounds just fine at 112kbps if you resample to 44.1khz (there are noticible artifacts at that bitrate if you leave it at 48khz). That gives you a bit more room for video. I recommend using HeadAC3he for audio encoding.

Quote:
Also i'll see if Gripfit can do something about this pioneer issue, so, will encode and cross my fingers.
Quote:
I don't think it will. GripFit basically just replaces the Crop/XxxResize step in the script, so you'll end up with exactly the same encode as if you did it manually with FitCD. It is easier though .
I thought so too, but, " hope is the last one that falls "like we say...


M0rdant wrote

Quote:
For Pioneer players you can try encoding in mpeg 1 as usual (352x480, 528x480) but burn the mpeg 1 file as an SVCD with VCDeasy. I've had good results doing this with my 343.
I'll try that M0rdant, and i'll tell you if it works for me, i hope it does


Well, back to work.

See ya

Pacodoni
Reply With Quote
  #589  
01-14-2003, 04:29 PM
SansGrip SansGrip is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,135
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daagar
I'm curious if such smoothing would help or hinder on a source that has already been processed
Smoothing would help reduce artifacts from the original, while adding noise would help hide the DCT blocks. It really depends on the source, and there's no correct general answer. There's only correct answers for one particular source.

Quote:
I know, I know, I need to go do some testing myself.
That's the only solution, I'm afraid. I try a bunch of different combinations of filters for each source, and pick the best compromise of detail-retention and compression.
Reply With Quote
  #590  
01-14-2003, 04:42 PM
SansGrip SansGrip is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,135
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Signs

Desired size: 723,540,206
Actual size: 711,133,314
Difference: 1.74%
Factor: 1.0

Hmmm.
Reply With Quote
  #591  
01-14-2003, 05:46 PM
KingTuk KingTuk is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 107
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
motion search precision

How big of a difference is there between normal and high quality?
Reply With Quote
  #592  
01-14-2003, 06:43 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by SansGrip
Signs

Desired size: 723,540,206
Actual size: 711,133,314
Difference: 1.74%
Factor: 1.0

Hmmm.
So 723,540,206 * 0.98 = 709,069,401.88
That's closer to actual.
Maybe the .98 is a better "average" factor?

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #593  
01-14-2003, 08:53 PM
syk2c11 syk2c11 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 290
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi SansGrip,
The sample you posted, did you use "High quality" or "estimated motion search" or "Normal". Does it really make such a big difference in quality between "High quality" and "estimated motion search", high quality takes so long!
Reply With Quote
  #594  
01-14-2003, 09:02 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 syk2c11
Does it really make such a big difference in quality between "High quality" and "estimated motion search", high quality takes so long!
Yes it does!. By switching from fast to high quality, the final file size is smaller for the same footage. So you can compensate by increasing the CQ value and the end result is WAY better quality

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #595  
01-14-2003, 09:44 PM
SansGrip SansGrip is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,135
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by syk2c11
The sample you posted, did you use "High quality" or "estimated motion search" or "Normal".
I used "high quality".
Reply With Quote
  #596  
01-14-2003, 09:52 PM
urban tec urban tec is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: West Australia
Posts: 272
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
For Pioneer players you can try encoding in mpeg 1 as usual (352x480, 528x480) but burn the mpeg 1 file as an SVCD with VCDeasy.
Hi M0rdant,
I have found this also help with audio if I burn as svcd I can use min 300 otherwise I need to use min 750 (Pioneer dv344), I have however noticed a sort of shimmering in some scenes when I use this method that does not exist if I burn as vcd, have you experienced the same?
Reply With Quote
  #597  
01-14-2003, 10:49 PM
KingTuk KingTuk is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 107
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Yep I just did a 90 min movie with normal and high quality with the same CQ settings and normal ended up being over 10 megs larger. I'm sure the difference will vary per movie...

How about highest quality? anyone willing to wait that long? Does it save even more space?
Reply With Quote
  #598  
01-14-2003, 10:51 PM
SansGrip SansGrip is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,135
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingTuk
How about highest quality? anyone willing to wait that long? Does it save even more space?
Nope, it actually increases the file size.
Reply With Quote
  #599  
01-14-2003, 10:59 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 SansGrip
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingTuk
How about highest quality? anyone willing to wait that long? Does it save even more space?
Nope, it actually increases the file size.
Weird, isn't it . I wonder what algo is being used internally for that

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #600  
01-14-2003, 11:01 PM
SansGrip SansGrip is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,135
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
Weird, isn't it . I wonder what algo is being used internally for that
I read somewhere once (maybe Doom9) that "highest quality" actually "finds" motion that isn't there. Hence more motion vectors, hence a larger file size.

I'd still like to know what algorithm it's using for "motion estimate", whether it's PMVFAST or another tried-and-tested algorithm or some home-grown version.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Avisynth: Interesting results with YlevelsS supermule Avisynth Scripting 2 08-06-2006 11:59 PM
Avisynth: Interesting ASharp phenomenon... audioslave Avisynth Scripting 12 10-23-2003 06:36 AM
Interesting info about the Luminance Level in CCE digitalize Video Encoding and Conversion 0 04-28-2003 12:29 PM
A couple of interesting links.. kwag Off-topic Lounge 0 12-31-2002 03:47 PM
KVCD: Interesting poll found kwag Video Encoding and Conversion 2 12-31-2002 02:44 AM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:21 PM  —  vBulletin Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd