My preliminary test. ffmpeg 0.4.7 vs. TMPEG 2.520
 

8O :jawdrop:
That's all I can say :mrgreen:

TMPGEnc sample.
http://www.kvcd.net/downloads/tmpeg-15sec-352x240.mpg

ffmpeg sample.
http://www.kvcd.net/downloads/ffmpeg-15sec-352x240.mpg

I've encoded both samples at 352x240, and at a low bitrate, to bring out the artifacts and blocks on both samples. To me, ffmpeg CLEARLY has much better motion estimation algorithms. The picture is much cleaner and stable than TMPEG.

Comments :?: :?: :?:
I think I'm going to do some full encodes on my MAC VERY SOON :!:


-kwag

Are these tests with the standard matrixes or yours? (Michael Niedermayer wrote: "set AVCodecContext.inter_matrix / intra_matrix" to set a custom matrix)
Did U use ffmpeg commandline or libavcodec (via another program)?
Do U have some encoding time's? (yust for fun ;)

I used the default matrix. I used ffmpegX for those samples.Well, I didn't really benchmark, because I'm on a old crappy PowerPC G4 ( Overclocked to 450Mhz ).
But it's just a little slower than TMPEG (by seconds), so I imagine that on a 1+Ghz machine, it will fly :lol:
I have to try it on my 800Mhz (g3) iBook :cool:

-kwag

Well I recognised that the FFmpeg Example is only build upon I and P Frames! And that the picture looks just a bit more green, well just a bit ;-)

I remember this of my MAC encodings using FFmpegX ....

But the case of I and B frames .... :roll:

That won't work.We need I, B and P, or I and P. But not I and B.

-kwag

Oh sorry, I wrote too fast!

As I mentioned 4 lines above ... only I and P Frames ... thats why Im wondering ... when I opened the ffmpg example in Vdub

That's odd, when using ffmpeg on the commandline it fly's, It created a 800 mb. vcd mpeg1 in about 25 min. on a XP2600, mpeg2enc takes 100 min. and tmpgenc 90 min.

b.t.w. If you ever wanna get rid off your "crappy PowerPC G4", how far do you live from Holland? ;-)

Ok :lol:
Right now, ffmpeg doesn't work with B frames. If you encode something with I, B, P structure, you'll get an amazingly garbled mpeg file, which crashed my VLC player and bombs WMP too :lol:
But for I and P, it works very well, so it should do a very descent job on high bitrates ( for DVDs, etc. )
Not to mention that it must do an extremely good job for I frames only, for very high quality, high bitrates ;)

-kwag

My G4 is old, but still good :)
And from Holland to Puerto Rico, it's a Loooooooong way :mrgreen:
Look where we are:
http://www.geographic.org/maps/new2/...rico_maps.html

-kwag

Hummm, maybe I can make a raft like Thor Heyerdahl...
:?

Sorry KWAG it's a bit offtopic but its also MAC based:

Im trying to find a PC! - DVD Authoring Appl. which is easy to use like "DVD Studio Pro" for MAC.

Up to now I encoded my jobs on a PC and authored the stuff on a MAC using DVD Studio Pro, cause its the most easy-using-and-best-looking-user-interface-dvd-appl I know.

And now Im looking for a PC appl. like this above.
It has to handle "2" Audiostreams per Movie Track! Thats why I only use TMPGEnc DVD Author only for my 1 CH Capture Movies.
Ok. Maestro is one (seems to be in some points equal to DVDstudioPro), but the menue building functions of Maestro are horrible, ... no Photoshop layer import! :cry:
Not mention the horrible looking, complex appl. "Scenarist" :puke:

What do you use as a man who is also blessed by using mac appl. design? 8)

If there exist a Topic for exactly this question, please move it, Thx!

maestro is fine I think...
Do a nice bmp menu and import it... then u set where on your bmp the buttons are and finito...
I hated I till I used it 2 times... now I come along pretty fne with it :D

Hi incredible,

I don't do any authoring (yet!) at all on my MACs. As a matter of fact, I installed not too long ago MAC OS X on my mac. For the past 2 years, my PowerPC had been running YellowDog Linux, as an internal server for backups, ftp, etc. But when OS X 10.2 came out, I decided to install it. So I don't really know what applications are available on OS X for authoring.
I'm really a *BSD person. I use Linux for play, and *BSDs for work (for obvious reasons ;) )

-kwag

Well Kwag,

in this case with osx installed try DVD Studio Pro,.... and you will know what I mean! :D Also Final Cut Pro.

Well today I created a DVD authored with Maestro and its the best one I could find of the non-complex-2CH Audio-capable apps out there.

But I think Ill stay with my G4-Server which which I still also use to author the DVDs and to burn them with "Toast". When importing PSD Docs containing layers, you can choose every layer as action, highlight, and so on- buttons. Have a look at the snapshots at apple.com. I never had to study a guide to get into this app.

;-)

[offtopic off]

About the offtopic:
To create menus with Maestro, Use DVD Menu Studio from MediaChance. It's the best tool to create menus with Maestro, it even takes care of resizing, NTSC saturation and other stuff. And you can import subpictures straight in Maestro. I used it a lot before I moved to DVDLab (which I think doesn't support 2 audiotracks, but I am not sure about that).

[]'s
Vmesquita

Here's another sample. Captured from an analog C-Band satellite channel.
It was captured in my Panasonic DMR-E80 at the highest quality, and encoded at 352x240 @29.97fps with an average bitrate of 1,150Kbps, min 300, max 2,500.

Like this:

Then same as above, with -pass 2, for the second pass.
Demuxed with TMPEG, and remuxed with BBMpeg.

Here's what you get :mrgreen:
http://www.kvcd.net/downloads/analog.mpg

I'm beginning to like this encoder :cool:

-kwag

Try a lower birate and the tune won't be the same.

I was as happy than you in my first tests but once I changed bitrate to 800 (2 hour movie on a CD80 and 112 Kb/s for audio)... I ended my tests :-)

Note: one question : why don't you just turn audio of in ffmpeg and do audio separatly as always ? You lose a lot of time doing all these demux/mux operation. No ?

Oh yes it is :!:
Specially if you run it twice for 2 pass. Try the command line parameters I used, and change the resolution to 720x480. Use -b 2000, so that will give you ~2000Kbps average.
The motion estimation wipes out TMPEGs, and there are less blocks :!:
The day all bugs are ironend out, and we can use AviSynth and scripts for input, this encoder will be the MPEG-1 king :cool: Try the same with TMPEG (no filters), and you'll end your test faster ;)
I tested a clip at 720x480 with both ffmpeg and TMPEG, and there's virtually no difference in quality, but again, the motion estimation in ffmpeg is far superior than the one used in TMPEG. There are hardly artifacts around objects with this encoder 8O Not really. Encoding the audio in HeadAC3he will take between 30 to 45 minutes on average. With ffmpeg, I'm encoding 4X realtime at 352x240, and about 1.5X realtime at 720x480, with audio included :!:
And the average bitrate, when run twice ( for 2 pass ) is right on the nose. So I see the marking on the wall: Good bye prediction :mrgreen:
This encoder can encode two passes, faster than a single CQ pass with TMPEG :!:
It can only get better :cool:

-kwag

Kwag, a 800 Kb/s is what we are doing everyday when making a KVCD. Remember... 2h of movie on one CD... that's what we are here for, no ? :-)

But the main difference is there I guess :
Thats true that without any filters, I wonder I never find TMPEGEnc so good at 800 Kb/s :-D

352*288 / 25 fps and the image was all blocky at 800 Mb :-(. But I found the problem : that was an interlaced movie and I didn"t use the "deinterlace" parameter of ffmpeg. :arrow: Things are a lot better with the correct options ON :-)
Yeah, but TMPEGenc can encode audio also and we don't use it for a question of quality.
Does ffmpeg better than TMPGEnc on this point ? Not sure (you surely didn't have the time to do this for the moment, so do I ;-)). And what will be the result on a 5.1 AC3 audio stream ? Humm...

About this : I had very close file size with PASS 1 also. Was that a coincidence ?

For the avisynth script input, I tried to make a false avi using "makeAVIS" delivered by ffvw. But ffmpeg don't recognize the codec AVIS. As you have the nose in the source (;-)), perharps you can look forward to see if this decoder can be included easily.

-kwag[/quote]

I don't think so, but it's worth a try :)
I still nothing beats HeadAC3he ;) Good question :!:
ffmpeg is supposed to process AC3 files too. So maybe we should do an audio test :idea: Indeed, me too :D
Yesterday, I encoded a movie at 352x240, and the first pass was 804,000KB. The second pass was 817,725KB. So the first pass did an extremely accurate job, and the second pass, just made the perfect fit :!:
I used CalcuMatic to get the average. Yes, I also tried to create a pseudo avi with VFApiConvert, and it didn't recognize it.
More tests to come :D

-kwag