Avisynth: Optimal Script Now Fully Adaptive - Page 5

kwag · #81 06-30-2003, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ovg64

Yes i see a diference of 20mb in file size, but

is there a difference
in Quality between 62.58% n 62.95%

Nah

, there's not

Quote:

i dont think so but it would be great to be closer to the target w fast prediction.

Let's see: A CD-R is approxmately $0.25 each. About a quarter. So 30 MB would be 3.75% of 800. Now 3.75% of a quarter is 0.0093 cents. Do we really want to find the correct CQ to fill the disk with no visual quality gained for less than one cent

I don't

-kwag

J-Wo · #82 06-30-2003, 11:10 PM

I think we could just up our prediction factor by a smidge if doing fast prediction, no? Like say 1.01 or 1.02

audi2honda · #83 06-30-2003, 11:16 PM

I keep coming up 5 or 6% short even though as you guys said the CQ values are close. I'm going to keep trying, but I think 48 frame samples at 2 per minute will really slow down prediction time, but we'll see. I haven't tried yet.

kwag · #84 06-30-2003, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-Wo

I think we could just up our prediction factor by a smidge if doing fast prediction, no? Like say 1.01 or 1.02

We could, but what guarantee do we have that when ToK is using fast prediction, the 0.5% sample is not over instead of under the wanted size

So you could end with -30MB or with +30MB, depending if the sampler was -0.5% or +0.5% from wanted file size. I rather do a full prediction with a factor of 1.0 just to be sure. I'm currently starting to encode a complete different movie I haven't tried with the latest settings. It's "Under Siege 2". We'll see tomorrow how it comes out

-kwag

bman · #85 07-01-2003, 03:07 AM

@ Kwag
I'm encoding "Foreigner" Pal version and have 2 problems
1 . Encoding with last script is taking 8hr 20 min and with script before
last changes 3hr 35 min
CQ = 61 in both cases and res=704x576
with last script quality is slightly better (less mosquitos around subs )
but encoding time ~3 times slower ????

What could be the problem ???
2 . Prediction with Tok 0.0.5.2 or 0.0.5.3 with fast mode always
results files 40-50mb smaller then whanted .

I tryed to play with param's but cant get constant results with different movies .
bman

Abond · #86 07-01-2003, 08:16 AM

Hi bman,
For me ToK never worked correctly, so I tried another procedure which gave me correct results for PAL, but it is not wide tested. I will give you a link to the post
http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic....=asc&start=128
Try it, if you want.

bman · #87 07-01-2003, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abond

Hi bman,
For me ToK never worked correctly, so I tried another procedure which gave me correct results for PAL, but it is not wide tested. I will give you a link to the post
http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic....=asc&start=128
Try it, if you want.

Thank's Abond !
I'll try that as soon as I'll arrive home

bman

Krassi · #88 07-01-2003, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bman

2 . Prediction with Tok 0.0.5.2 or 0.0.5.3 with fast mode always
results files 40-50mb smaller then whanted .

I tryed to play with param's but cant get constant results with different movies .
bman

Hi bman,
have you tried ToK 0.0.5.2 with a Sampler length of 24 or 48

My predictions are within 1% since i use these settings (doesn't matter if i use faster prediction or the older one). You could also try to go for a higher value at samples/minute.

bman · #89 07-01-2003, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Krassi

Quote:

Originally Posted by bman

2 . Prediction with Tok 0.0.5.2 or 0.0.5.3 with fast mode always
results files 40-50mb smaller then whanted .

I tryed to play with param's but cant get constant results with different movies .
bman

Hi bman,
have you tried ToK 0.0.5.2 with a Sampler length of 24 or 48

My predictions are within 1% since i use these settings (doesn't matter if i use faster prediction or the older one). You could also try to go for a higher value at samples/minute.

I'm using 24 as sampler length !
I've try 48

Thank's Krassy
bman

kwag · #90 07-01-2003, 09:38 AM

Here's my result on "Under Siege 2":

Code:

=============================================================
ToK Log: F:\temp2\under.avs
=============================================================
 
Resolution (fps):528x480 (23.976 fps)
Total Frames: 143220
Total Time  : 01:39:33
-------------------------------------------------------------
 
Audio Size: 83,622,000
Required Video Size: 735,578,000
 
Factor: 59.940
Desired Sample Size: 12,271,906
 
-------------------------------------------------------------
Prediction: 1st Group of Passes
-------------------------------------------------------------
 
Next CQ: 64.740. Sample Size: 13,759,185
Next CQ: 57.742. Sample Size: 11,472,843
Next CQ: 60.714. Sample Size: 11,571,574
Next CQ: 62.365. Sample Size: 11,584,085
Next CQ: 63.334. Sample Size: 12,776,402
Next CQ: 62.887. Sample Size: 12,245,618

Exit Condition: 0.500 % reached ! yahoo !
Tries   : 6
 

Final CQ: 62.887
Total Time For Predicition: 00:33:24

 
-------------------------------------------------------------
Encoding F:\temp2\under.avs
-------------------------------------------------------------
 
Encoding... CQ : 62.887
Final Encoded Size: 713,747,819
Total Time (all operations): 05:16:25
 
Finished

For a difference of ~-21MB and an accuracy of ~2.96%.

-kwag

bman · #91 07-01-2003, 10:05 AM

Thank's Kwag !!!
I'm encoding with 704x576 and it takes ~8.5hr to encode .
U have encoded 528x480 and it took ~5.25hr to encode .
So 704x576 / 528x480 *5.25 = 8.4 hr
It's about the time that took me to encode "The Foreigner" with CQ 61 .
I'm happy that my system is tuned up and quality is great too but 8.5hr
encoding is too much time for me , on job that could be done in 3.5hr with previous script and hardly noticable difference

Correct me if I'm wrong

bman

kwag · #92 07-01-2003, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bman

Correct me if I'm wrong

bman

There is a HUGE difference in quality from the old 2.0x script (non-adaptive) to the new Motion Adaptive script

-kwag

bman · #93 07-01-2003, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwag

Quote:

Originally Posted by bman

Correct me if I'm wrong

bman

There is a HUGE difference in quality from the old 2.0x script (non-adaptive) to the new Motion Adaptive script

-kwag

Absolutely right !!!
We just missunderstand one each other

I'm talking about MA script before the last changes u made (with conditionalfilter and without )
With NEWEST script If u are encoding 528x480 it could be a big difference but not with 704x576 .
Even on 34" TV it's hard to see difference cos TV is smoothing most of mosquitos .
That's just my opinion , That's what I see

bman

Sykes · #94 07-01-2003, 10:48 AM

Somethins wrong with jul 1st script 2.52
(Keep gettin white writing on the screen along with my movie that i am encoding)

jorel · #95 07-01-2003, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sykes

Somethins wrong with jul 1st script 2.52
(Keep gettin white writing on the screen along with my movie that i am encoding)

Sykes,download temporalcleaner here:
http://www.avisynth.org/~warpenterprises/

i think that you don't have this filter for use in the new script!

editing:
no need the filter no more,
temporalcleaner was changed for temporalSoften.
copy the script again!

kwag · #96 07-01-2003, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sykes

Somethins wrong with jul 1st script 2.52
(Keep gettin white writing on the screen along with my movie that i am encoding)

You bet you are

Change this line:

ScriptClip("nf = round(YDifferenceToNext()+1)"+chr(13)+ "nf > 2 ? \

Dialhot's line read:
ScriptClip("nf = round(YDifferenceToNext())"+chr(13)+ "nf > 2 ? \
and the value would go to zero, which causes "division by zero".

With the above fix, now it never goes below 1

-kwag

kwag · #97 07-01-2003, 12:04 PM

Looking at the changes by Dialhot, I overlooked something

The values are integer now, but that throws OFF completely the boundary between the switching of blurring and temporal filter. Before, there was a floating point precision. And now it's sharp values that jump from 1 to 2, and that's NO good

I'm revising the script again

Edit:
Ignore this post. I need sleep. The script is correct

-kwag

Sykes · #98 07-01-2003, 07:36 PM

vhelp · #99 07-01-2003, 09:00 PM

hi Kwag..

Quote:

Well what can I say , here's a sample from the last encode
I think this just can't get any better ( at least for the next 48 hours )
This looks almost like ( or like? ) my DVD
** www.kvcd.net/k-pax-fixed-adaptive.mpg
Comments always welcome

-kwag

Just finished D/L'ing your latest sample clip. And, I must say, looks VERY
good in PDVD v3.0 !!

Please keep it up

Hay, we're gonna have a LONG weekend this week. Our company is letting
us go Thur and Friday !! And, I've got things cooken for this week/end..
See you then..

..TGIW, almost here hehe..

Be well all.
-vhelp

andybno1 · #**100** 07-02-2003, 01:41 AM

I'm seein blocky areas in my encode anyone suggest what I can change or add to the optimal script datetd 1 july?