Quantcast Bitrates: CQmatic Bug Reports - Page 4 - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #61  
07-23-2003, 07:02 PM
J-Wo J-Wo is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 454
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Kwag I'll give Beta 4a a whirl but I was still getting the bug with Beta 3 where it would just keep predicting the same CQ (presumably the correct CQ). I'll do another prediction with the same starting CQ to see if I get the bug again.
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
  #62  
07-23-2003, 07:34 PM
tigger tigger is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 74
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
hi kwag!

beta4 looks fine, best one yet hehe...

prediction is fine, will see the result tomorrow (in form of the filesize *g*), will let you know

thx again for this great work!

bye
Reply With Quote
  #63  
07-23-2003, 07:53 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 NismoSX
Is it normal that one prediction cycle is taking almost 20 minutes to complete? This with a 140 min. movie. It's going real slooooow....
Using the same script in ToK only takes 3-4 minutes on the first cycle.
This with a XP 2500 Barton. (Just upgraded)
Is that a full screen movie
If it is, and for the length of the movie, probably
But it seems quite a long time

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #64  
07-23-2003, 07:54 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 tigger
hi kwag!

beta4 looks fine, best one yet hehe...

prediction is fine, will see the result tomorrow (in form of the filesize *g*), will let you know

thx again for this great work!

bye
Get BETA 5

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #65  
07-23-2003, 07:55 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 J-Wo
Kwag I'll give Beta 4a a whirl but I was still getting the bug with Beta 3 where it would just keep predicting the same CQ (presumably the correct CQ). I'll do another prediction with the same starting CQ to see if I get the bug again.
Get BETA 5
That should be gone now.

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #66  
07-23-2003, 08:00 PM
tigger tigger is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 74
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
hehe too late )
im encoding now, beta4 needed 4 predictions to find out the cq, looks fine, think it will work fine...

post you the results tomorrow
going to bed now

bye
Reply With Quote
  #67  
07-23-2003, 08:08 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 tigger
hehe too late )
im encoding now, beta4 needed 4 predictions to find out the cq, looks fine, think it will work fine...

post you the results tomorrow
going to bed now

bye
That's fine
You should get the same CQ as in BETA 4. The changes were only to correct high CQ values on short movies

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #68  
07-23-2003, 09:42 PM
NismoSX NismoSX is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 23
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
Quote:
Originally Posted by NismoSX
Is it normal that one prediction cycle is taking almost 20 minutes to complete? This with a 140 min. movie. It's going real slooooow....
Using the same script in ToK only takes 3-4 minutes on the first cycle.
This with a XP 2500 Barton. (Just upgraded)
Is that a full screen movie
If it is, and for the length of the movie, probably
But it seems quite a long time
Nope, it's a 576 x 320 AVI file. I let it run for 2.5 hour, and it was still prediciting when I decided to cancel. When predicting time exceeds encoding time, then there must be something wrong.
Really weird. I'll see tomorrow if the Duron 1300 at work is any faster.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
07-24-2003, 12:41 AM
totonho03 totonho03 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Fallston, MD. USA
Posts: 419
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hello:

I have two issues tha I can not resolve.
1.- I am getting the "illegal stream format" error. Please note that I have ensured that the source range was cleaned, prior to loading the avs file. After setting the kvcd settings @ tmpgenc, and checking the settings, I saved the .tpr as text.
Once Cqmatic started working, it gave me the error message. However, it continued encoding at CQ 90. Which will bring me to my second point:

2.- This is a 4:3 movie, and Tmpgenc was adjusted accordingly, however, the movie appears to be stretched, as viewed in the TMPGenc screen... which more or less is an indication on how it will look in the TV set.
My TMPGenc settings:
Mpeg1
352 X 480
4:3 display23.976 fps (Please note that avi stated that this was a 29.7..fps)
Automatic VBR, CQ 60
max rate: 2000kbps
min rate: 712 kbnos ( 1249X.57).Advance settings:
Interlace
Bottom field first (field b)
4:3 display

It will take 12 hours to complete this kvcd, so......... will check it it again tomorrow a.m. (I may just sto encoding at 9 or 10 a.m. tomorrow)

One thing that I just noticed, while I am very sure that under the video tab, the aspect ratio was 4:3 NCTA, hoewever, after loading the .tpr file is now encoding as 1:1 (VGA). Similarly, in the advanced tab I selected the 4:5 525 lines NTSC, however it is now working under 4:3 display

Thanks Totonho
Reply With Quote
  #70  
07-24-2003, 12:56 AM
Krassi Krassi is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 390
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by totonho03
1.- I am getting the "illegal stream format" error. Please note that I have ensured that the source range was cleaned, prior to loading the avs file. After setting the kvcd settings @ tmpgenc, and checking the settings, I saved the .tpr as text.
Once Cqmatic started working, it gave me the error message. However, it continued encoding at CQ 90. Which will bring me to my second point:
Hi Totonho,
please try doube-clicking on Source Range and confirm the error messages. Renew start and end frame and leave the window. Then uncheck it again and save your project.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
07-24-2003, 01:26 AM
tigger tigger is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 74
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
hmm

cqmatic did a fine job on calculating the cq, but the filesize was too short,

instead of being 687 mb for the videostream, the file was 508 mb

testing beta 5...
Reply With Quote
  #72  
07-24-2003, 01:39 AM
Krassi Krassi is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 390
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Beta 5 seems to have squashed the bug.
Haven't had the same error with looping
I' ll test Beta 5 right now with a short movie.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
07-24-2003, 01:45 AM
tigger tigger is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 74
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
testing now also
hope beta5 is solving my problem here
lets pray :P :P :P
Reply With Quote
  #74  
07-24-2003, 04:17 AM
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
I just looked at my result from "K-Pax", done with BETA 5, and the file size was also ~-20MB, perfectly consistent with my previous encode of "Boondock Saints".
I'm doing a long one now (K19), to see if it matches the same final ratio.

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #75  
07-24-2003, 05:08 AM
Krassi Krassi is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 390
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I can't believe it. The bug seems to exist also in beta 5:
Start-CQ:55, 23 mins movie, 833-2000, Script without filters.

After many predictions CQMatic gave 3 times 51.84, then lowered to 51.83 and now its repeating this value . Can this be a PAL issue
Reply With Quote
  #76  
07-24-2003, 05:21 AM
Krassi Krassi is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 390
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Another one i've just had:
Because i had problems with the starting CQ of 55 and 60, i lowered it to 50. After one prediction, it encoded directly. Same with starting-CQ of 40 .

Sorry Kwag bothering you with so many bugs
Reply With Quote
  #77  
07-24-2003, 05:32 AM
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 Krassi
Another one i've just had:
Because i had problems with the starting CQ of 55 and 60, i lowered it to 50. After one prediction, it encoded directly. Same with starting-CQ of 40 .

Sorry Kwag bothering you with so many bugs
Not at all bother as many times as needeed
That's the way things get fixed
Why isn't that I can't reproduce that here
So you mean that when you started at 40 and 50, it found the CQ in one try
But it was about the same CQ to encode, but not 40 or 50 right
Let me look again at the source. This can't be a PAL issue. It's a kwag(bug) issue
This might be a stupid question, but I have to ask: You are sure you are running the BETA 5 executable It does show "Beta 5" when you run CQMatic, because it happened to me the other day, that I was running an older version, thinking it was the latest

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #78  
07-24-2003, 05:38 AM
Krassi Krassi is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 390
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
Not at all bother as many times as needeed
That's the way things get fixed

Quote:
Why isn't that I can't reproduce that here
PAL-maybe...
Quote:
So you mean that when you started at 40 and 50, it found the CQ in one try
Yep.
Quote:
But it was about the same CQ to encode, but not 40 or 50 right
Not sure what you mean. First time it was 50, second 40. Thats what surprised me. Now i've started from 20 and its around 24 now...
Quote:
Let me look again at the source. This can't be a PAL issue. It's a kwag(bug) issue

Quote:
This might be a stupid question, but I have to ask: You are sure you are running the BETA 5 executable It does show "Beta 5" when you run CQMatic, because it happened to me the other day, that I was running an older version, thinking it was the latest
Yep. Using Beta 5.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
07-24-2003, 05:42 AM
Krassi Krassi is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 390
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krassi
Now i've started from 20 and its around 24 now...
And now its stucked to 23.93
Reply With Quote
  #80  
07-24-2003, 05:53 AM
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 Krassi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krassi
Now i've started from 20 and its around 24 now...
And now its stucked to 23.93

Anyone else with this problem
What is your TMPEG version ( not that it should matter, if the program is running )
What Windows version are you using
Sorry to bother ( ) but I'd like to narrow things down

-kwag
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bitrates: CQMatic 1.4.08 Metabodom Video Encoding and Conversion 2 05-22-2005 07:01 AM
Bitrates: CQmatic nighthawk Video Encoding and Conversion 36 01-14-2004 11:20 AM
Bitrates: CQMatic Version 1.2.03 Reports kwag Video Encoding and Conversion 24 11-16-2003 05:33 AM
Bitrates: Help when CQMatic is over/under J-Wo Video Encoding and Conversion 1 08-23-2003 12:19 PM
Bitrates: KDVD bitrates with CQMatic nicksteel Video Encoding and Conversion 10 08-06-2003 08:44 AM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:24 PM  —  vBulletin Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd