Minimum syntax for DVD compatibility, simplified :)
Quote:
Autoaspect will be default is you don't define aspect on the command-line. Bilu |
|
Link to search on the MPlayer mailing lists, add to Favorites :)
Bilu |
Quote:
Quote:
Nice idea Settings.ini :wink: , do we have to make a separate file named settings.ini, isn't it?. And we have to store it in mplayer directory, with codecs.conf, don't we?. ...keep us informed on feedback you all get at forum9, to improve our KDVD encodings :D |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Well, not really tested since I put it on Mencoder's directory, but makes sense :) Bilu |
About quality tests: these should be made with vqscale=2, so that rate control doesn't mess with filesizes.
Bilu |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quality test results - fixed quantizer
11.482.354 default.m2v 11.312.817 mbd2.m2v 11.291.988 mbd2_mv0.m2v 10.347.085 mbd2_mv0_vle_vce.m2v 9.960.207 trell.m2v 9.539.090 all.m2v Tests made using vqscale=2. Since these are rate-distortion parameters the smaller the file gets the better the parameters are. And trellis quantization is a clear winner: mbd=2,mv0, vcelim=7 and vlelim=-4 together couldn't get even near trellis alone :) All the *_mask parameters work around quantization, so they give absolutely no result here. Believe me, I tested ;) Also trellis-related parameters beside trell were no good here: cbp works around quantization, qprd crashes, qns is slow as hell even with the rest as default :? alt increases filesize. Filters ==== 8.656.030 hqdn3d.m2v This denoiser alone gives better results even then trellis and it's faster :) Bilu |
Hi digitall,
as far as -include goes (and your .ini settings file) as long as you point to it in your .BAT file, you can pretty much store your "options config" file anywheres :) I've ben using this technique for the last week now (I had posted how to write an .INI "options config" file last week, in my other thread, which I changed for obvious reasons, the SUBJ title for w98/se/me :wink: * MEncoder under W98 / SE / ME - (work in progress) .. Later on, I'll be adding instructions on how to read in vdub --> avisynth script, for even more flexibility :mrgreen: (I was debuggin if over the weekend to be sure it worked well) and I know RDS was on my tail about it :wink: sorry rds, I've ben brain-storming other things, and I couldn't post sooner. Anyways.. Now, W98/SE/ME do not have to suffer anymores (me for instance) and can join in the fun :mrgreen: Well, I gotta get going for an apointment now, and I'm late. If I forget to take care of the above, just remind me later on.. thanks. Cheers guys, -vhelp |
Quote:
Yes, I like trellis a lot. But even if mbd and mv0 aren't better, can't we make use of all of them?. And I don't like the results I get with vcelim and vlelim with these parameters, seems to me that colours get poorer, more plain Quote:
@vhelp thanx for your advises. I would also put in settings.ini the Notch inter/intra matrix. I'm willing totake a look at your GUI for mencoder friend. @all, again, thank you for being patient :? EDIT: BTW bilu, did you take a look at your tests in bitrate viewer?, how did they perform?. And did you a visual comparison?, are the smaller files still "good looking"?. |
Quote:
Quote:
And the better the macroblock gets predicted, the smaller the filesize will be :) That's why I made this tests aiming at a fixed quantizer, so they wouldn't be affected by rate control. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
With lumi_mask=0.3 and dark_mask=0.3 this file got as small as 2Mb when not using fixed quantizer. On Bitrate Viewer it showed a lot of quantizers 6 and 7 and still looked pretty :) But when using fixed quantizer they didn't work at all. This leaves us with a second conclusion: if you want to use mask parameters on a 2-pass encode, use them only on 2nd pass, and with naq. Because they wouldn't have any effect at all during the 1st pass.And naq will allways help trying to keep things within average bitrate. Visually all files looked good. And you really have to look at the output of this denoiser, it looks very nice to me ;) Bilu |
Quality test results - variable quantizer
Well, since I liked the denoiser output so much I didn't made the test with trellis related parameters like cbp or qns. :twisted: But I'll show you how to test: don't use naq. If it visually looks good and got much smaller then it's a good parameter :) The winner here is scplx_mask=0.3 . It provided much better results than lumi_mask or dark_mask (tested on a panning trees scene, a bit dark) in terms of filesize. Tried scplx_mask=0.5 , but it's way too much and gets blocky. Of course that when doing real encodes we should use naq. It will try to keep the average bitrate so that encoding filesize is still predictable. Bilu |
My settings for 1-pass VBR encodes
Quote:
A B C A AC C Where A,B and C are normal fields and AC is a blend from the previous and next frame. So periodically you have an interlace frame because one of the fields is blended. Try to imagine bitrate peaks like 10080 kbps with vqscale=2. And blended fields. And high-action anime. 8O When trying to do a VBR encode at 3000 kbps I got lots of lose blocks in one scene. I realized then that it was an high-bitrate scene and B-frame compression was showing more info from the next field than the current one in some macroblocks.Those lose blocks looked like coming from the next frame. That in a high-action, blended field, interlaced anime is a complete disaster :roll: When I disabled B-frames the problem stopped. Probably that's the reason why this parameter exists: Quote:
So this was the best solution I came up with so far. Since trell also works with macroblocks, I'm testing trell with vmax_b_frames=2 with the same denoiser filter, just to see if trell can help with B-frames. EDIT: It didn't help at all. So I'll use no B-frames in 1-pass encodes and try vb_strategy=1 in 2-pass encodes. If the bitrate misprediction caused by this parameter can't be compensated by the 2-pass algorithm then I'll abandon B-frames there as well. Bilu |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Limiting vqmax and mbqmax, how does bitrate raise in your bitrate demanding test?, does it still respect vrc_maxrate? I'm trying to figure out some basic parameters (applyable in majority of encodings), and will try to select a set of parameters to apply in specific situations (bitrate demanding film, dark film, slow motion film,...). But still stuck in basic parameters. Also, already started to try to encode SKVCD with mencoder (maxrate 2500, avg vbitrate with formula), to substitute KVCD encodings with TMPGEnc. But get lots of blocks in fast scenes (well still beging, just 1 encode). |
Tested mencoder for KVCD. I tried maxrate=2800, vbitrate=1211 (trying to fit a film on 1 CD), but got lots of blocks in transitions from slow to high action (in bitrate viewer there was a sharp raise in Q value at 29, and sharply down).
I tweaked a bit, lowering vqmax an mbqmax to 10, but still the same. Maxbitrate was respected more or less (max 3100 in BV), file size slightly higher. Tried again raising vbblur at 0.3 to avoid those sharp changes in Q value, to see if improved something, but didn't get better. Still testing. I'll try not to use trellis... |
Quote:
About file size predition, still don't know since I've been working with very small samples ( VOBs < 50 MB) Quote:
But since I like this denoiser output I don't have the need for trellis to encode on a PIII-500 :D Limiting vqmax and mbqmax forces the 1-pass VBR algorithm to compress more the scenes that are less bitrate-demanding to keep the average. It respects the maxrate, but it isn't able to keep the average on small samples like the ones I'm testing, which is normal. I have to start making tests with a minimum half movie to make sure about file size prediction. Meanwhile I tested that scene again without using naq. As I knew, quantizers got raised since it's not trying to keep an avg bitrate through the naq parameter. But the 1-pass VBR algorithm still tries to keep that average so the more bitrate-demanding scenes have more room to grow and overall quality gets much better. Still I have to tune it decreasing scplx_mask=0.3 to 0.2 or 0.1, because although overall quality got much better, it's still a bit too blocky. I think that naq is more appropriate for 1-pass CBR than 1-pass VBR. Don't know yet about 2-pass VBR, probably is better to use it as well. But it seems better to have a smaller mask than to use naq. Bilu |
Good news: problem was not B-frames, but the denoiser settings in the settings.ini file :)
I tried before vf=hqdn3d=1 Now replaced them with the default values vf=hqdn3d=4:3:6 And everything works like a charm ;) EDIT:Wrong again, tried lower bitrates and the B-frame shit comes back :evil: Bilu |
Hi bilu,
I don't know if you feel the same, but it seems to me that less people is posting in this forum... :( Don't say people is not testing, neither they dropped mencoder/ffvfw, it's just no posts. I'm glad you solved your ghosting problem. I'm still struggling with mencoder settings to get rid off blocks in low bitrate (as low as max 2800 avg 1211). I'll try without naq as you did. But there's a scene (film: Spirit, Disney, animation) where it's snowing, and snow becomes lots of blocks. I'm begining to feel lost. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
BTW, did you give notch-matrix a try?. You could set it in ypur settings.ini file. You'll see that file size decrease, without loosing quality :) Well friend, wait your feedback while making tests... tests... tests... :roll: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
preme=2 and the B-frame problem is no more :wink: EDIT: Wrong again :( in a bigger sample the problem showed again. Still this parameters is really good :) Bilu |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.