06-26-2003, 09:47 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 423
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
|
Someday, 12:01 PM
|
|
Site Staff / Ad Manager
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
|
|
|
06-26-2003, 10:13 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 291
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
[quote="kwag"] Quote:
Originally Posted by bigggt
Yes ovg64,i think we all could live with that
YES IT IS  I'M GOING TO BUY SOME BEER
The script is now "FREEZED", and file prediction is again considered STABLE
-kwag
|
It's Miller Time  woot. Starting to run my tests and I can't wait to see the results.
|
06-26-2003, 10:27 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Here you go guys 
Here's the small sampler of K19 (~1MB), so that's how the whole 138 minutes looks like on one CD-R
http://www.kvcd.net/k19-fast-predict...-cq-63.209.mpg
Enjoy 
-kwag
|
06-26-2003, 11:12 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 147
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
So do we continue using tok 0.0.5.2 or can we go back to 0.0.5.3 and what settings should we use?
David
|
06-27-2003, 12:16 AM
|
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 DKruskie
So do we continue using tok 0.0.5.2 or can we go back to 0.0.5.3 and what settings should we use?
David
|
Hi David,
I havent tried that yet 
I'll give that a shot too, and see if the CQ matches a very close CQ as 0.0.5.2.
If it does, then we can use 0.0.5.3 
I'll run both predictions. The full, and Tenra's "Fast" prediction.
Only if both match, I would then use 0.0.5.3.
-kwag
|
06-27-2003, 07:11 AM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Here's the result with ToK 0.0.5.3, which uses "SelectRangeEvery()" instead of "Sampler()" for prediction.
This was on my "K-Pax" movie.
CQ found using "Tenra's" Fast prediction: 70.138
CQ found using normal (long) prediction: 69.940
The CQ found by ToK 0.0.5.2 was 65.51 using Tenra's "Fast" mode, and the full prediction was almost the same number. And that is the correct CQ, because I left the movie encoding last night, and the result this morning was +1.73% accurate
This proves that the "SelectRangeEvery()" is a problem for prediction, but SansGrip's method of selecting frame range is excelent 
So I would stick to 0.0.5.2. Other than the file prediction method used, there's no difference from 0.0.5.2 and 0.0.5.3
-kwag
|
06-27-2003, 07:55 AM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 423
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Hi Guys, last night i encodes (A guy thing) 1:41 min 70.61% CQ on one CD output video was 710MB, audio was 83MB for a total file size of 793MB.
This was using tok 5.2 n tenras fast prediction, so i guess this turkey is really cooked now.
|
06-27-2003, 08:42 AM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Hi ovg64,
What was your % accuracy on that encode
-kwag
|
06-27-2003, 08:58 AM
|
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brasil - MG - third stone from the sun
Posts: 5,570
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
and please Osvaldo,
write all details,..if is mpge1 or 2,the "resize",time of the source,
everything cos i loose the high prediction again,
then i need of all informations.
my CQ back to 56 "house" again.
|
06-27-2003, 09:36 AM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 423
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Hey Guys, here you go;
Mpeg 1
712 mb video wanted 710 obtain
83 mb audio at 112 kbps
1, 24, 2, 1, 24 gop
Fast Prediction *
Factor 1.00
Sample Auto *
# sample/min. 1
1 Group Pass
presicion % 0.50
speed up by 10
10:00 % presicion
80min. CD -1
Quote:
ToK Log: C:\Documents and Settings\Osvaldo\Desktop\Movie\Script.avs
================================================== ===========
Resolution (fps):528x480 (23.976 fps)
Total Frames: 145985
Total Time : 01:41:29
-------------------------------------------------------------
Audio Size: 85,246,000
Required Video Size: 733,954,000
Factor: 59.940
Desired Sample Size: 12,244,811
-------------------------------------------------------------
New Faster Prediction
-------------------------------------------------------------
Full Sample
Next CQ: 70.000. Sample Size: 11,254,886
Small Sample
Next CQ: 70.000. Sample Size: 939,425
Predicting...
Next CQ: 76.157. Sample Size: 14,983,732
Next CQ: 72.356. Sample Size: 14,156,339
Next CQ: 70.991. Sample Size: 12,825,089
Next CQ: 70.560. Sample Size: 12,167,126
Next CQ: 70.693. Sample Size: 12,403,408
Next CQ: 70.615. Sample Size: 12,255,363
Exit Condition: 0.500 % reached ! yahoo !
Tries : 7
Final CQ: 70.615
Total Time For Predicition: 00:10:34
Total Time (all operations): 00:10:34
|
|
06-27-2003, 09:42 AM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 454
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
ovg64: That's great that you got such an accurate prediction! I've been wondering lately at what point should we predict using 2 samples/min instead of the default 1? I've pretty much been raising it to 2 whenever the movie is shorter than 2:00:00 long, but I see this one is 1:40:00. Any opinions?
|
06-27-2003, 09:54 AM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 423
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-Wo
ovg64: That's great that you got such an accurate prediction! I've been wondering lately at what point should we predict using 2 samples/min instead of the default 1? I've pretty much been raising it to 2 whenever the movie is shorter than 2:00:00 long, but I see this one is 1:40:00. Any opinions?
|
I dont know but it sims like sample() is more accurate than selectevery()
use in tok 5.3 at least in Avs 2.52, cause yesterday i use 3 setting mine, kwags n Tenras and they all came to around the same 70% CQ for this same movie.
|
06-27-2003, 10:43 AM
|
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brasil - MG - third stone from the sun
Posts: 5,570
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
really strange Osvaldo.
my source:
Resolution (fps):480x480 (29,970 fps)
Total Frames: 159173
Total Time : 01:28:31
Audio Size: 84.967.000
Required Video Size: 734.224.000
 and my best CQ56,255!
why i with: less resize, less time movie got less CQ
i need a BIG help
|
06-27-2003, 10:56 AM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 423
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorel
really strange Osvaldo.
my source:
Resolution (fps):480x480 (29,970 fps)
Total Frames: 159173
Total Time : 01:28:31
Audio Size: 84.967.000
Required Video Size: 734.224.000
 and my best CQ56,255!
why i with: less resize, less time movie got less CQ
i need a BIG help

|
What are you ecoding  National Security  1:28:31 time
post your script i think maybe one of your filter might be doing
this are u using DGbob  you are using 29fps that might be another
reason.
|
06-27-2003, 11:18 AM
|
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brasil - MG - third stone from the sun
Posts: 5,570
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
no Osvaldo,no DGBob no more i cahnge to fielddeinterlace!
see my script:
MaxTreshold=1.50
nf=0 # Current frame.
Mpeg2Source("D:\La Luna\Segment2\DVD2AVI_PROJECT_FILE.d2v")
FieldDeinterlace()
undot()
Limiter()
asharp(2,4)
GripCrop(480,480,overscan=1,source_anamorphic=fals e)
GripSize(resizer="BicubicResize")
STMedianFilter(8,32,0,0)
MergeChroma(blur(MaxTreshold))
MergeLuma(blur(0.2))
ScriptClip("nf=YDifferenceToNext()"+chr(13)+"nf>2. 5?\
unfilter(-(fmin(round((nf/0.5)),100)),-(fmin(round((nf/0.5)),100))):\
TemporalSoften(2,7,7,3,2)")
GripBorders()
Limiter()
function fmin(float f1,float f2){return(f1<f2)?f1:f2}
thanks in adbvance!
ps:
Jell is helping me too in the "best scripts" thread...
of course,something is wrong in my system and
i don't know what is ?!?!?
|
06-27-2003, 11:37 AM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
@jorel
Look at the Optimal Scripts forum...
__________________
j3llyG0053
|
06-27-2003, 02:55 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 423
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Hey Jo your script looks ok to me, i dont know maybe tok doesn't pred. well with 29 fps. Maybe you want to experiment a bit i would maybe put undot after the resize n take out the deinterlance filter just to see what kind of CQ you get or maybe try another deinterlance like tomsmocomp
for 2.52 and experiment a bit you know im not a brain like you but i some how solve my problems
|
06-27-2003, 03:05 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 390
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
This proves that the "SelectRangeEvery()" is a problem for prediction, but SansGrip's method of selecting frame range is excelent 
So I would stick to 0.0.5.2. Other than the file prediction method used, there's no difference from 0.0.5.2 and 0.0.5.3
-kwag
|
I can confirm this for PAL-Sources. Prediction is very accurate for PAL using ToK 0.0.5.2, a Sampler Length of 24 and the newest adaptive script, even with Tenras new prediction. The prediction was 0,3 % accurate on a middle action movie.
Thanks to Kwag, Jellygoose and all others for helping figure this out.
Maybe we should contact Pegasys-Inc. to determine if theres a bug in PAL-GOP encoding  .
|
06-27-2003, 03:44 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 103
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
This proves that the "SelectRangeEvery()" is a problem for prediction, but SansGrip's method of selecting frame range is excelent 
So I would stick to 0.0.5.2. Other than the file prediction method used, there's no difference from 0.0.5.2 and 0.0.5.3
-kwag
|
Does this mean that we can continue using v0.0.5.3 and just substitute
SansGrip`s "Sampler"??? (sorry if this has been answered already)
Or do we need v0.0.5.2,<---(???) If so...where can we find that version??
*******************************
The Devil`s always.....in the Details!
|
06-27-2003, 04:06 PM
|
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brasil - MG - third stone from the sun
Posts: 5,570
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
@ Jell
thanks, i read all there and waiting your helper answers.
@ vico1
good question,i want to know the same.
@ Osvaldo
tomsmocomp is worse,decrease the CQ.
i change deinterlance to just before and just after resize and change just a little...insignificant.
fielddeinterlace is in the better place in the script,
(thanks to Boulder and Phil for big explanations about deinterlace and ivtc)
you wrote:
"...i'm not a brain like you..."
you are in better perspective,you have a good brain working,
mine is lost.
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:57 PM — vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd
|