Quantcast FFmpeg: FFvfw Video Codec - Page 4 - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #61  
01-27-2004, 05:09 PM
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 kwag
So I stick with a MIN of 2 and MAX of 25 (25 to keep a higher MIN bitrate above zero), and this way I can forget all about prediction


Well as you see above I do my tryings on the TrumanShow, so lets assume we want to fit that on incl. 128kbit audio to one CDR-80 ... in quality 83 it would fit, but the quality doesent (at this moment) match the quality of TmpgEnc.
If I would rise to 95, the wanted filesize will get over the needed one which would fit on one CDR-80 .... so I do not understand why do you think "prediction" will be the past ?

EDIT I will do now one 23.976 encoding
(resized to ntsc and AssumeFPS(23.976)
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  
01-27-2004, 05:12 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
I meant prediction for KDVDs. Not for KVCDs.
For KVCDs, TMPEG is still the champ
Until the issue of MIN and MAX bitrates (constraints) is not added to ffvfw, we can't really use it for doing KVCDs.
But for (K)DVDs, that's a different story

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #63  
01-27-2004, 05:15 PM
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 kwag
I meant prediction for KDVDs. Not for KVCDs.
Achsoooo!

Well ok, that I didn't knew ... so we should do our contest CCE vs ffvfw ... as this would be more real as until now CCE was our nice KDVD producer.



Ok, I watched your samples! No matter if low bitrate or KDVD bitrate: ffvfw looks sharper, thats a fact.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
01-27-2004, 05:18 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 incredible
as until now CCE was our nice KDVD producer
Volunteers to do some tests
( I don't have CCE )

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #65  
01-27-2004, 05:44 PM
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
Next encode will be a PAL to ntsc (conversion via Avisynth) frameserved one.

Here at 704x576 (cutted by half) one using ffvfw Quality 95 and CCE Q30 both are 13200 kb



Again these problems on Surfaces/underwater i.e.



Kwag, do not see my contra-examples as offense to your ones!
But it seems that this codec still got its problems on especially surfaces etc.

Could you do a comparison also, by taking such scenes as shown above (underwater etc.)
Reply With Quote
  #66  
01-27-2004, 05:44 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
Sorry, sorry, sorry,...
Such a high quality thread, and me here with silly newbie questions...

How the hell am I supposed to make VirtualDub start encoding mpeg?. I just see, in the File menu, options for "Save as AVI...". And what about VB version, or doesn't mind?.
... be patient
Reply With Quote
  #67  
01-27-2004, 05:48 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
@Phil,

Here's a screenshot comparing TMPEg and ffvfw, on that scene "through the windshield":

TMPEG:

FFVFW:


BTW, the TMPEG sample I encoded to extract the image, is 139KB and about ~1,400Kbps average, while the ffvfw sample is 116KB and ~1,100Kbps averege bitrate.
Blow it up, and see for yourself

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #68  
01-27-2004, 05:51 PM
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
@ Doc
Just install that baby as mentioned "some"() pages before and do load your avs in Vdub(mod) and do safe that one as avi using full processing mode and there you choose the ffvfwmpeg4 codec, ... do your settings as shown in the pics some posts before of Kwag and determine that the frames will only be safed in that determined mpeg (I directly name it .m2v) file, thats all.

BTW, CCE is about 70% faster than ffvfw

Now doing 23.976 encoding....
Reply With Quote
  #69  
01-27-2004, 05:55 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 incredible
Kwag, do not see my contra-examples as offense to your ones!
I dont
Quote:
But it seems that this codec still got its problems on especially surfaces etc.

Could you do a comparison also, by taking such scenes as shown above (underwater etc.)
Yes, and every test I make, ffvfw clearly shows better (FAR) quality that TMPEG
But I see that in your samples, it's the other way around
Could we have a difference in CODECs somewhere
I see the "scaling" effect on your samples, but I don't see that on my samples. Look at my last post, of the two screen shots "through the windshield", and you'll see that TMPEG's sample has more blocks compared to ffvfw, when you blow it up. I also watched the scene, at the beginning of the movie, where the boat is in the water, and the quality is far better than the movie I encoded with TMPEG.
So we must have something different

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #70  
01-27-2004, 05:57 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
incredible,

What matrix are you using in ffvfw
Reply With Quote
  #71  
01-27-2004, 06:21 PM
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
1. Notch
2. My new one
3. rocs MVCD
4. Standard

I tried all

And sometimes the GOP seq does fit the IBBPBBP... and sometimes I do have 90% P frames in the whole framecount ... And everytime then an I frame at scenechange occurs
Reply With Quote
  #72  
01-27-2004, 06:37 PM
rds_correia rds_correia is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Chinese Democracy starts now!
Posts: 2,563
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Guys,
There are 2 main differences in both Kwag's and Inc's tests:
1-Movie title for testing
2-PAL/NTSC
So you would have the same movie (in diff region anyway) so you could run some tests in sync?
Otherwise Kwag could have a PAL movie for testing or Inc could have a NTSC movie lost in his lab.
I think that's the only way we will understand what's happening.
Personally I tried ffvfw with kwag's settings and the results were great.
At least in terms of quality because ffvfw is really REALLY slow compared to anything
On the oposite Mencoder was 1,5 - 2 times faster than TMPGEnc and it's also based on libavcodec as ffvfw
Also the guys from the "penguin arena" always said that it was very accurate in terms of file size and I could testify that the quality is GREAT also...
Hard times these we're going through...
C ya
__________________
Rui
Reply With Quote
  #73  
01-27-2004, 06:40 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
Then I really suspect a PAL issue
Look at my GOP, which looks almost the same on every encode:



-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #74  
01-27-2004, 06:49 PM
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
Find da breaks!! I got the only P frame issue solved!

If you set the min I frames the same as max I frames (maybe 18/18) to avoid that scene change detection, the encoder seems to get confused and drops the B frames out, cause I just reset to 15/1 and now he respects my B frame count!

Ok, that's the first problem which is solved, so lets see if I can get rid of the "other" problems ... AND I WILL! :lol:
Reply With Quote
  #75  
01-27-2004, 06:59 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 incredible
Ok, that's the first problem which is solved, so lets see if I can get rid of the "other" problems ... AND I WILL!
Now check your quality again on a small clip

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #76  
01-27-2004, 07:08 PM
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
Still too much blocks (or uneasy parts) at fast moving scenes and still fading surfaces.

(Since 3 Encodings Im doing 23.976 704x480!)

EDIT/Update!!:
a 704x480 at mpeg2 23.976 1% predicted gave me 8566kb, would mean a whole 100% encoded video-stream of 836,5 MBs! Damn!!! 1140 kbit/s ! 3-Bframes, diff Matrix)

And here are the still parts! Excelent for that size! (but maybe luck) and endfile size (1% of whole stream)




But heres still the problem with the bitrate allocation at high-motion parts:
(same 1% encoding!)



But I keep on playing ...


And ... as I gotta work tomorrow Ill go to bed now and continue tomorrow evening!

So good night everybody!
Reply With Quote
  #77  
01-27-2004, 07:29 PM
rds_correia rds_correia is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Chinese Democracy starts now!
Posts: 2,563
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Damn good results though, Incredible.
I wonder if you guys could speed up ffvfw, let's say, 45-50% because that way it would be just as fast
as tmpgenc and much better in quality also.
Ok, 00:23 and my lady is already calling me to bed...
It's just not fair that I cannot carrie the pc with me to bed
C ya all tomorrow.
__________________
Rui
Reply With Quote
  #78  
01-27-2004, 07:46 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 rds_correia
It's just not fair that I cannot carrie the pc with me to bed
C ya all tomorrow.
Get a Notebook PC and set up a WIFI (Wireless) network in your home.
Then you can browse the forums, while your wife reads a book

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #79  
01-27-2004, 08:14 PM
Hydeus Hydeus is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Omicron Persei 8
Posts: 322
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
WOW
I've gone only for 8 houres and you have made all that mess Clean this up boys, and no more play ball in the house

@incredible
I did'nt know that you have played in the Truman Show
@Correia
In my test ffvfw (MPEG1) is 30% faster than TMPG (MPEG1). I'll do test with ffvfw M2 vs TMPG M1, but maybe not now (01:58 AM) I know that youre goal is to get a faster encoder than TMPG with equal or beter quality.
@Krassi
You preformed two pass encode with MPEG1 or MPEG2 engine? Second question, how (it always crashes in my VDMod+2passMPEG1), and what VD version (or maybe other tool)?

@all testers
Did you try to encode with SATD in stead of SAD comparison function. It's slower (almost equal in speed to TMPG) but IMO produces beter quality.

From my test (I always do smal test on LotR 1 trailer ~3min) quality is far beter with ffM2 than TMPG M1, so in this point I'm switch to ffvfw. Only one test with standalone compliance (but I think that will be no problem). It was'nt with MPEG1, even in such weird 480X280 res and 24fps
__________________
Go for SECAM =)
Reply With Quote
  #80  
01-27-2004, 09:21 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 Hydeus

@all testers
Did you try to encode with SATD in stead of SAD comparison function. It's slower (almost equal in speed to TMPG) but IMO produces beter quality.
I did. No visible difference.

-kwag
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 12:41 AM  —  vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd