Quantcast FFmpeg: FFvfw Video Codec - Page 12 - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #221  
02-02-2004, 09:53 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 Dialhot
In fact this codec can replace almost everything on your disc
It has almost everything AviSynth has

-kwag
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
  #222  
02-02-2004, 10:03 AM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellygoose
DCT blocks on flat surfaces
This is one area that need improvement on this encoder. As you did, using internal noise or adding Blockbuster, fixes the problem.

-kwag
I wouldn't say the encoder needs improvement there. TMPGEnc has identically the same problem there, with the difference, that Blockbuster won't fix it in CQ mode. (at least not with such a low variance)
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #223  
02-02-2004, 10:11 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 Jellygoose
I wouldn't say the encoder needs improvement there. TMPGEnc has identically the same problem there, with the difference, that Blockbuster won't fix it in CQ mode. (at least not with such a low variance)
Yes you're right
Apparently Blockbuster is very effective with ffvfw, and as we already know, that's not the case with TMPEG in CQ mode.
But still, it would be nice it ffvfw is further optimized for better quality on low dim areas, because you can clearly see the dancing blocks laughing at you most of the time

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #224  
02-02-2004, 10:41 AM
incredible incredible is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,189
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to incredible
Yep, Indeed you have to rise sometimes the "variance" parameter cause that fine spray means high frequencies which will be "cut" by the Notch which does exactly perform more quantization on high frequencies and if Notch and ffvfw "get in touch" that means a lot of quantization mostly on plain parts ... by this the edges wont get that "gibbs" effect
Reply With Quote
  #225  
02-02-2004, 11:35 AM
Dialhot Dialhot is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,463
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Kwag, you told that you remove the K-notch matrix for a while. Can you tell me what would be the expected size of the whole movie you encoded in such conditions ?

(I can't open the sample at my office and check its lenght )

An other way to ask the same thing : is the encoder still abble to put 3 movie on a DVD without the matrix ?
Reply With Quote
  #226  
02-02-2004, 11:41 AM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
You mean anamorphic or non-anamorphic?
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #227  
02-02-2004, 11:41 AM
incredible incredible is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,189
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to incredible
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil
is the encoder still abble to put 3 movie on a DVD without the matrix
Why droppin the Notch if you want 3 Movies to fit on one DVD-R? Did I miss something in here?

My suggestion for example to Jell was to drop the notch in case if the final filesize isn't big enough But he tried to fit 2 Movies on one DVD-R.

But thats also the nice thing that mpeg2 ffvfw supports diff. Qant.Matrixes.

Or what's your purpose Phil?
Reply With Quote
  #228  
02-02-2004, 11:46 AM
nicksteel nicksteel is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 863
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Which settings (if any) need to be changed in ffvfw to produce anamorphic? (Two movies per DVD are enough for me).

Thanks, guys,

NickSteel
Reply With Quote
  #229  
02-02-2004, 11:51 AM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
You need to set AR to 16:9 in the "Output" tab. Avisynth will do the rest for you. Just make sure you check anamorphic box in MovieStacker/fitCD.
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #230  
02-02-2004, 12:04 PM
nicksteel nicksteel is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 863
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks, Jellygoose. That's what I thought.
Reply With Quote
  #231  
02-02-2004, 12:19 PM
digitall.doc digitall.doc is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Valencia (España)
Posts: 741
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by incredible
Why droppin the Notch if you want 3 Movies to fit on one DVD-R? Did I miss something in here?
Well, I suppose it'll be better Kwag answering this, but he said he had turned OFF "Custom quantization tables", because KVCD's notch matrix just cuts off too many frequencies with this encoder.
... I don't exactly know what does this mean ( ), but he said he'll revise this issue later.
Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #232  
02-02-2004, 12:35 PM
Dialhot Dialhot is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,463
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by incredible
Why droppin the Notch if you want 3 Movies to fit on one DVD-R? Did I miss something in here?
Just what Kwag said :

"If you notice, I've turned OFF "Custom quantization tables", because KVCD's notch matrix just cuts off too many frequencies with this encoder. I'll revise that some other day, when I get to talk with Milan. "

I guess that he wanted to say that the quality with the matrix was too bad. But he didn't tell anything about the size of the final encoding without the matrix.

My purpose isn't to put 3 movies on the disc (acutally I do 2-movie KDVD ). I just want to know if the encoder still has the same efficiency without the matrix that it had with it ! Because an encoder that do better that TMPGENC but can fit only one movie on a DVD, we can find it easly !

Else, the only advantage of ffvfw will be it is free (and CCE is not, for instance).
Reply With Quote
  #233  
02-02-2004, 12:38 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hmmm even with mode set to CBR I can't seem to adjust the filesize the way kwag described it. Altering Max. Quantizer difference doesn't change the filesize at all for me.
Any other opinions?
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #234  
02-02-2004, 01:06 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 Dialhot
Kwag, you told that you remove the K-notch matrix for a while. Can you tell me what would be the expected size of the whole movie you encoded in such conditions ?
Expect almost twice the space without the notch matrix
However, if you don't have an HDTV, ffvfw with the notch matrix looks just great.
Even on my HDTV, I can see some slight DCT blocks when I used the notch matrix with ffvfw, but because I had encoded with noise, the picture is really very pleasing. So on regular TVs, even large ones, this won't be seen, and you should see an excelent picture.
Quote:

An other way to ask the same thing : is the encoder still abble to put 3 movie on a DVD without the matrix ?
Nope
I don't think so. The milage should be about 4 hours without the KVCD notch matrix.
With the notch matrix, expect ~7 hours

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #235  
02-02-2004, 01:14 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 Dialhot

I guess that he wanted to say that the quality with the matrix was too bad.
Not really
It's very acceptable, but not as good as CCE
Quote:
But he didn't tell anything about the size of the final encoding without the matrix.
There is where the advantage is
About half the space as a CCE encode, but not half as bad in quality
It's actually very good quality, but for some purists, it may not be
Quote:

My purpose isn't to put 3 movies on the disc (acutally I do 2-movie KDVD ). I just want to know if the encoder still has the same efficiency without the matrix that it had with it ! Because an encoder that do better that TMPGENC but can fit only one movie on a DVD, we can find it easly !
Well, if you plan to fit just 2 movies with quality equal or better (in motion estimation) than CCE, then use the internal matrix, and you'll be fine
Quote:

Else, the only advantage of ffvfw will be it is free (and CCE is not, for instance).
Right now, I would say that ffvfw is almost a-la-par with CCE. At least after seeing that sample I encoded, where there is so much action, and the results are better than CCE. ( Can't confirm that now, again, because I don't have CCE.)

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #236  
02-02-2004, 01:39 PM
Dialhot Dialhot is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,463
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
Expect almost twice the space without the notch matrix
That much !

Quote:
However, if you don't have an HDTV, ffvfw with the notch matrix looks just great.
Okay. So, let say I do my encode with Notch matrix (has I have a regular 34" TV set). Can you tell me what I have to look at carefully to determine if the matrix is cutting too much or not ?
In other words : "Cuts off to many..." means what on my screen, visually speaking ?

(I guess is like when you push too far the DCT filter in avisynth, but I want to be sure).
Reply With Quote
  #237  
02-02-2004, 01:50 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I still cannot change the filesize of my samples at all, except by lowering the Bitrate in CBR. How do you do it kwag?
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #238  
02-02-2004, 01:58 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 Dialhot
In other words : "Cuts off to many..." means what on my screen, visually speaking ?
High frequency details. Only on fast motion scenes, you'll see (maybe?) some macroblocks, because of bitrate choke.
You'll have to do some short clip tests by yourself, with and without the matrix, to compare quality and file sizes.
Quote:

(I guess is like when you push too far the DCT filter in avisynth, but I want to be sure).
Maybe.
But the best trade off right now, will be using the notch matrix with some noise (Blockbuster?) added, so your file size will increase but still be well below the size as if you had used the internal matrix without noise.
I believe that's the perfect blend, for the moment, for using this CODEC.
Maybe in the future, when the CODEC is further optimized, we can start to drop blockbuster noise, and do less filtering

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #239  
02-02-2004, 02:02 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 Jellygoose
I still cannot change the filesize of my samples at all, except by lowering the Bitrate in CBR. How do you do it kwag?
You can drop the file size, either by lowering the MIN Q value, or by lowering the Bitrate in CBR, as you have done.
As a matter of fact, I'm looking at that just right now, and it seems that the CBR value is actually sort of an "Average Bitrate" control
Because after you encode some footage, at least on my case, the resulting average bitrate is close to the value I set on the CBR slider, even though the MAX bitrates still peak above 3,000Kbps (possibly because I have the MIN Q set to 2 )
So it's a combination of MIN Q and CBR value, to get what you want

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #240  
02-02-2004, 02:04 PM
Latexxx Latexxx is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 65
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
[quote="kwag"]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellygoose
As a matter of fact, I'm looking at that just right now, and it seems that the CBR value is actually sort of an "Average Bitrate" control
It isn't possible to encode true cbr using MPEG.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FFMPEG vs FFVFW vs Mencoder ? bilu Video Encoding and Conversion 561 04-15-2004 06:16 AM
FFMPEG: Observation about ffvfw poerschr Video Encoding and Conversion 28 02-24-2004 05:50 PM
FFMPEG: Ffvfw - What is video buffer verifier and what is it matter? Prodater64 Video Encoding and Conversion 1 02-23-2004 07:46 AM
FFMPEG: Do ffvfw and mencoder/ffmpeg give the same results? Razorblade2000 Video Encoding and Conversion 4 02-06-2004 04:23 PM
FFMPEG: XMPEG 5.03 and ffvfw kwag Video Encoding and Conversion 2 02-05-2004 10:57 AM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:03 AM  —  vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd