![]() |
Kwag,
Does the latest changes on the optimize script applicable or will work best only for a very clean material like DVD? Thanks, Dredj |
Re: LOL
Quote:
Quote:
-kwag |
All I can show about how things are going is: :ole: keep up the good work ppl shows what teamwork can do.
:fahr: (had to do this one seen it and thought it was funny) |
Jorel sent me that one :arrow: :fahr: :D
-kwag |
Re: LOL
Quote:
|
Man this stinks. A new movie just finished and was 7% short of target for 1CD. 50 wasted MB bah :evil:
|
Quote:
|
hey audi, you're not the only one getting short video files! Kwag are you the only one getting accurate prediction? Sometimes my movies are only 90 min long so I usually do prediction with 2 samples per minute. In my latest encode:
Required Video Size: 732,032,000 Encoded Video Size: 693,986,212 That's 38 Mb short, or 5.2% off. Frankly I don't know what this means but a prediction factor of 1.0 for me is NOT doing the trick. |
@audi2honda,
You bet it can :!: You'll probably need to sample a wider "window" to get a better accurate result, and even that I'm not sure if it will be accurate enough. All my encodes have been progressive. I'm pretty sure that if your material was 100% telecined, and you use telecide and decimate, you'll still get accurate resulte. But mixed 8O :?: :!: :!: Not sure. -kwag |
Ok I'll try one of my progressive DVDs tonight when I get home.
J-Wo are you having problems on clean progressive material or just other material? My current project are DVD versions of a television series that have all sorts of hybrid nasty interlaced stuff in them. Telecide and decimate produce wonderful results, but I guess that could be throwing prediction. Kwag do you recommend more samples per minute or a longer sample size? or both? |
Quote:
-kwag |
It's a randome mixture but after frameserving from AVS with the telecide and decimate functions isn't it all clean 23.976 when it gets to TMPGEnc? I would think in that case prediction would be accurate because TMPGEnc doesn't know since it's allready been converted or IVTC'd
|
Yes but because the film is not going to be smooth ( some parts will be smooth and some will be jumpy ) that will throw off any prediction for sure :!:
-kwag |
Quote:
|
audi: yes, my sources are 100% film and all progressive. They are from clean DVD or SVCD sources. Kwag, any idea what is throwing off prediction for me? I almost want to revert back to before you got MA with full linearity
|
Quote:
-kwag |
Quote:
|
Hey guys, I was having some trouble with prediction too, my video files were also 30-40megs short or so. I think I've gotten around it by changing the # of frames per sample from 24 to 48, and the # of samples per minute from 1 to 2. I'm also following Kwag's advice and doing full prediction, which always seems to increase CQ by a liiiiiiiitle bit vs. fast prediction. But there it is.
|
Well, today I encoded the same movie (K19) twice, but after the first encode, I changed the prediction to full without exiting ToK. I did this on purpose to log the "fast" CQ and the "normal" CQ on the same log. Here's the complete log:
Code:
=============================================================With fast, CQ = 62.584 and file size = 676,918,065 Witn normal, CQ= 62.951 and file size = 696,413,210 Look at the difference in file size, 19,495,145KB but on CQ, it's only 0.367 :!: Again I got 0.964% ( less than 1% again! ) accuracy with the long prediction. That's why I'll wait the extra time for the longer prediction :idea: -kwag |
Quote:
in Quality between 62.58% n 62.95% :?: i dont think so but it would be great to be closer to the target w fast prediction. :) |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2026 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2026 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.