Of course... the audio... :x
i am usualy not using AviSource(movie, FALSE).
Anyway thanks a lot :D

Yeah, but what fun would that be? :mrgreen:

Ok I finally finished my spreadsheet- lot of work for file prediction :!:

I encode samples of Heist with this script:
which is very basic- no noise filters

here's the result:
http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/error.gif
here's the excel file for the Sigmoidal Curve parameter sticky post 8O: Heist_data.xls

I still think it may be possible to create a linear equation based on cq0 to ~cq50 and combine another one for cq50 to ~cq80 8O

ren

Yep, that is very weird 8O I wonder if this might have to do with the resolution :?: I used the KVCDx3 528x480 template
http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/error.gif

That is a very good possibility. I used 352x240 for my tests.

-Tenra

If this means that the curves are different for each resolution, we're screwed 8O

Don't worry, I'm working on a new formula where you take 3 or 4 short samples and the curve for your movie is automatically determined. :wink:

-Tenra

I encoded a bunch of samples of"the Matrix" at 528x480 and graphed the sizes and it follows exactly the same pattern!
http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/error.gif
The peak file sizes (or the "ceiling") is higher with the Matrix samples 8O The bottom line is that it may be possible to determine the final size of the encode with one short sample at cq-100 and with a good formula (maybe range adjusted by resolution or number of pixels), making the process simpler :D :tongue2:

ren

OK, I'm finally done, and I think I have good news :!:

First, a chart, and then the explanation :lol: :

Please ignore the three columns in the center. They were used only for reference while creating the factors. The important numbers are the CQ on the left, and the *CQ on the right ONLY.

FS=File Size.
ABR=Average Bit Rate.
!AVBR=Linear(should be) Average Bit Rate.
*CQ=Use this CQ to encode.

This was done with 352x480 template to pick a "half way" point for resolution.

Now you only need to run a sampler ( ~30% or full ) one time only with CQ=100 :!:

And do this:
(1)Lookup the average bit rate that MovieStacker suggested.
(2)Divide Moviestacker's suggested average bit rate by your real average bit rate of your sample as seen on BitRate Viewer, and multiply by 100.
(3)Look up the closest number you got in step (2) IN THE LEFT CQ values column of the chart, and use the *CQ on the same line on the far right

Tada!. That's it.

Please let me know if this is on target, or if it has been a waste of time :cry:

Edit: Suggestion, I think it's better to run the one time full sampler instead of ~30%. This way we get a more accurate bit rate for the prediction. Also these numbers are to be used with KVCD's Q Matrix and GOP. They will be WAY off with anything else :!:

-kwag

@Ren,

Take a look at the numbers and see if it now matches close to what you had encoded before :wink:

-kwag

Hey! 8O
If this works I can code this chart into MovieStacker and
make a Prediction Tab to make all the choices and calculations! :wink:

Yesssssssssss :mrgreen:

I need people to test this. The chart was based on a 20 second sample. If the prediction is not at least 98% accurate, then I'll do a batch job overnight with a longer sampler, and then feed in the new values to the spreadsheet.

-kwag

Ok, my movie was Ronin.
MovieStacker says average bitrate was 2064 kbps.
Bitrate viewer says 1495
2064/1495 = 1.380602007 x 100 = 138.0602007 ?!?!?!

I used 528x480 with this script:
What did i do wrong?

2064 kbps average, 8O, no way :!:
Look again at the LEFT value on MovieStacker.
Right under the "Minutes" field.

-kwag

LOL! :imstupid: i figured it out, thanks!

Ok, so....

Ok, my movie was Ronin.
MovieStacker says average bitrate was 1001 kbps.
Bitrate viewer says 1495
1001/1495 = .6695652174 x 100 = 66.95652174.

So, i would use a CQ of 83?

That's it :)
Tell me your results :wink:

-kwag

8O Wow. A lot has happened since I was last here......

It might be just me but when I ran a full sampler, got the correct CQ, and then used this CQ and ran another sampler using manual file size prediction, the resulting file was about 2 megs bigger than my target size... :(

WARNING -SLIPPERY WHEN WET :lol: ALPHA ALPHA ALPHA Method, not even BETA

That's related to ALL my posts in this thread.
Ok, so you mean your "sampler" file size was ~2MB larger than with the standard method of file prediction :?:
What was your resolution :?:

-kwag

hey kwag,

I tried the table and it worked great 1/2 times- first time very close- second time off pretty badly :? If you want you can download my excel worksheet of Heist that I posted-- did you see that?

I'm confused about a couple things though:

1. The curve range is totally different between 352x240 and 528x480 (assuming the resolution is causing this)- so won't the error factor be different?

2. Why not just use filesize and not bitrate? Using the bitrate is a serious pain- first the recommended bitrate to use in MovieStacker is based on all the settings on the page (most relate to SVCD) :roll: It would be so much easier to just enter your error factor into the Predict2 function and it will display the correct cq to use :idea:

thanks,
ren

That's right, and my resolution was 352x480.

Hi ren,

Yes, the resolutions throw off the curve completely 8O.
I guess this exercise did turn into a "crap" ( for my posts :cry: ), because the method is very tightly integrated with the MIN, MAX and resolution I used. So there would have to be a chart for every template, and then if anything is changed ( matrix, etc. ) that would mean that a whole new chart would be needed. So, I slipped and fell on this one :twisted:
Thanks for trying it out. Now I'll go dig a hole in the ground and proceed to insert myself in it for a couple of hours, and meditate :roll: :x :x

-kwag

:x Read my response to ren above :x

No, wait, thats not what I mean :? ...I meant I ran Sampler at CQ 100, divided Moviestacker average by BitrateCalc average, turned out at 88.85...I then encoded a sample at 88.85, and, according to manual filesize prediction, my file should have been 11.4 MBs, actual file was 13.5.

Oops, didn't see your post kwag......oh dear.... :cry:

Right, that's what I thought. That's exactly the difference I got.
Now wait a minute :!: , coincidence :?: or could this mean we have a constant factor :idea: 11.4/13.5 = 0.84 so 0.84 * (*CQ) in chart for 352x480 resolution :idea: ( Last try :!: )
If that is the case, there is just one constant for different resolutions, and the same chart :idea:
Let me know, so I don't finish digging the hole 8)

-kwag

Does it make any difference if your target is 1 CD or 2 CD's for this chart? My sample size for Ronin is 21.5 Mb, which might be ok for 2 CD's, but what if i want it on 1 CD? I'm using KVCDx3.

hey kwag,

don't feel bad- I can't tell you how long i worked on that cheesy file size predictor thingy and then SansGrip put a nice one out with a gui at the same time (that was funny) :oops: :lol:

The good news is the shape of the curve is the same (i think more testing should be done to confirm this) so maybe if one sample at cq100 is encoded then the range of the curve can be adjusted in the equation based on the resolution :idea:

ren

:mrgreen:I just got a diff of .83 (see my previous post ) on another sampler, also at 352x480 8O.
So I'm running a sampler with the chart value * .83 to see if it hits the same file size that the regular formula wants. Then I'll try another movie to see if the factor is constant on a resolution basis.

-kwag

Hi Kwag..

I was following along Friday at work, and now here at home, (since I've
ben away surfing other areas of the world on a project)

Don't give up too easy. How about just mapping out for each of the major
resolutions and then formulating a Function(res, CDs, CQ) = CQ ??

The data could be stored in a table or DB table and imported into the final
App upon startup. This way, when NEWer data (continues, as it will) flowing
in, those will simply be added in to the calculation factor. Follow me so
far ??

Well, I have some reading up to do, as well as learn a few new things..

-vhelp

Well, it looks like the resolution doesn't really affect the curve to me...but then I could be wrong...anyway I made this to try and make some use of the data we have so far:
CQestimation.xls

I just used kwags results, and divided each filesize by the CQ 100 filesize to get a factor for each one, with CQ 100 as 1.000.

It seems to be able to predict an approximate CQ quite well on only a third sampler...although it sometimes underestimates the CQ quite a bit, but hasn't overestimated it yet, but then I haven't really tested it properly.

In only works in whole CQ numbers which probably affects how accurate it can be...looks to me like it needs a lot of work to be more accurate. Well, let me know if :imstupid: ......

It's a really stupid idea??? :oops:

Or has this project been abandoned and I just haven't realised yet?

Hey Pyromania,

I was not able to download your worksheet before, I got an error screen from geocities but I tried it again and now I'm looking at it in Excel 8)

I'm not giving up on this yet :roll: I've been doing tons of sample encodes and it's very time consuming :wink:

I'm going to check out your worksheet now

Here's the one I've been working on prediction.xls

ren