I re-did the tests, with the same sample (slices from StarWars II, 2% of whole movie).
With your settings/command (without denoiser, avisynth script): 28094 kB With the settings I posted: 33633 kB... buff, almost 120% your filesize. That means that the whole film would "weight" 1681650 kB, and 2129138 kB if I add the AC3 audio stream (just one :( ). Well, I could fit 2 long-lasting films like this per media, but just 1 audio track. Well, maybe with subtitles. And related to the image, to my eyes, with your settings the image looks like it was "dirty" (sorry me for my poor english), the colors aren't bright, looks washed up. With my settings colors are brighter, and image looks to me cleaner. And now that I got rid off blocks, my main problems are improve speed and compresibility... Any help will be apreciated,... or call me crazy if I'm trying to get what it's impossible. |
Main differences between our methods, easier to check this way:
setDVDHQ.ini: ========= vrc_eq=tex vbitrate=1500 vrc_maxrate=5000 scplx_mask=0.5 naq trell:cbp mbd=2:mv0 vmax_b_frames=2 cmp=2:subcmp=2:predia=-2:dia=-2 lmin=2.5:lmax=11:vqmin=3:mbqmin=3 SETTINGS.INI ======== vqcomp=0 vbitrate=300 vrc_maxrate=9800 scplx_mask=0.3 I'll have a look now. Bilu |
@digitall.doc
This will be our framework: settings at bold are my first proposal and the rest is a common framework, so it's easier to change :) Settings I removed for now: vrc_eq=tex (it says "do not follow the bitrate parameter") vrc_maxrate=5000 (I've seen scenes growing up to 7600 kbps even with my settings) scplx_mask=0.5:naq (better results and filesizes not using naq and using a lower mask, try it) vqmin=3:mbqmin=3 (min q=3 is limiting quality) lmin=2.5:lmax=11 Quote:
Quote:
I got to bitrates like 7600 Kbps even using this setting :) Strategy will be trying to see if quality fits your taste; reduce scplx_mask if it doesn't. When it matches your taste we'll try: 1) removing mbd=2:mv0 2) removing trell:cbp 3) removing cmp=2:subcmp=2:predia=-2:dia=-2 Each of them will be tried in separate. We won't remove B-frames since you're pleased with the quality. I only abandoned them because I had a weird interlaced stream. Bilu |
First of all: thanx a lot for helping me, since you found the settings that fit your needs/taste and there's no need to mess with somebody's else crazy command. You always :o :o :o :o
Also thank you for traslating some settings in a way I can better understand them. Sorry if I don't give feed back to fast, since I'm very busy right now (my job, nothing to do with image, neither encoding,...) and have lots of things to do. I'll try to keep you regularly informed. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Don't think from my comments I won't try your suggestions, I'll try every. But I aim CQ, since, in my tests, is more sharp and clean, not so blurry. BTW bilu, did you make a test with my command/settings. I'm curious about your opinion/result. |
BTW, I did some days ago a test I forgot to post.
I encoded the same sample I'm doing tests, with CCE (the same slices and the same avisynth script). With Q set at 30 the filesize was 43221 kB, and with Q at 40 (the maximum advised to get acceptable quality) filesize was 36903 kB (above my last settings). To my eyes, mencoder quality beats CCE at 40, and maybe at Q 30. And if I raise bitrate to 3000 or 5000, maybe filesize wouldn't grow as much as those 36903, and I would get definitely rid of those blocks that still appear from time to time, and quality would be much better... Nice mencoder ... some other thing is speed, with my settings/command mencoder is slower than CCE. But still developing and improving, isn't it?. |
My new settings, still being tested but seems very good now:
Quote:
I also increased scplx_mask but difference in quality/filesize is not significative. On my most sensitive test (low motion, clean anime) it made a big difference in quality. Of course it got bigger :) Old settings: Filesize -> 30.879.651 -> 11.448.379 Bitrate/QP -> 3460/6.06 -> 984/4.42 New settings: Filesize -> 30.879.651 -> 16.962.725 Bitrate/QP -> 3460/6.06 -> 1453/3.52 I'll never leave naq again :) Other recommended settings for quality improving (if you have the CPU): trell,cbp,mbd=2,mv0. trell makes the biggest difference and you need mbd=2 to use mv0. But on my PIII-500 it gets 50% faster without them (4fps->6fps :D ) @digitall.doc: still under investigation ;) Bilu |
The result from my last settings. Quality is much better.
Code:
Filesizes |
Quote:
Green: needed for interlaced and NTSC encodes. Blue: settings that improve quality at CPU cost. Orange: Quality trigger when used with *_mask :) I didn't include cmp=2:subcmp=2:predia=-2:dia=-2 because I think this brings speed down and quality improvements are nowhere near those provided by the "Blue" settings. I marked naq=1 differently because I intend to use it for high-quality encodes and remove it for extras/lower-quality encodes. I'm curious about its behavious in 2-pass, maybe it's the opposite: if we don't try to normalize per-MB quantizing, more bitrate is available :) If you're more demanding about quality remove the denoiser and the spatial mask and use the "Blue" settings. I still don't have an opinion about vqcomp/vrc_eq, I haven't seen side effects yet using vqcomp=0 or vqcomp=1 :? Bilu |
Hi bilu,
I'm happy to see you came closer to my settings (BTW, and I always explain that, they are your settings, before you started making tests). naq improves really a lot the quality. It comes at a filesize expense, but it really worth it, and as we're talking about KDVD, we can afford it. And I also agree with you about trellis, since quality improves, and it even makes filesize be less. Ah!, I tried qprd, and is not working: mencoder hungs (don't know if it was already posted in mencoder newslists, but if you have the time you could announce it, maybe a bug?, or I did something wrong). And I wait for your feedback on CQ vs CBR. It's not I want you to change your mind, or I want to always be right, I wouldn't like you got finally to think like this. Here I'm just learning, and learned a lot of mencoder from you. But I like best the output of constant quality, and is the way I'm accostumed to from previous encoders. Just test it, and tell me if it can be improved in a way. Of course, I'll give your last settings a try, but I think we're getting closer, and we have just to make clear if it is better the CQ approach (through vrc_eq=tex or vqcomp=1) or the CBR approach (through vqcomp=0). And a possibility of course, is that both be good ones. I'm thinking... I'm afraid there's more experience in mencoder encoding CBR since it has been mainly used to make divx ---> now you'll see I don't have much knowledge, but AFAIK divx is CBR based, isn't it?. That's why maybe CQ with VBR has not been too tested under mencoder till now. But I tasted it, and liked it a lot, and want to take the best possible of this approach. If it doesn't worth, I'll forget it. And if I arrived to this point, was thanx to your (and everybody else in here) help. |
Divx is VBR too. The 2-pass process was probably invented for MPEG-4 :)
qprd hanged on me too. I'll check today this vqcomp=0 vs vqcomp=1 thingy ;) Bilu |
I was writing while you were posting.
You explain so clearly things that can't be clearer. I also thought to remove cmp=2:subcmp=2:predia=-2:dia=-2 to see what happens. I took this idea from man_page, where it says (if I remember well) quality improves. I'll try and remove. Quote:
And maybe is just due to vrc_eq is not absolutely based on vqcomp, and you have to change vrc_eq to tex instead vqcomp=1 (I also wanted to test vrc_eq=tex_vqcomp=0, even it does not have any sense. Just a test to see what happens, if mencoder follows vqcomp or vrc_eq). |
:lol: :lol:
And again simultaneously posting :lol: :lol: Quote:
I'm really curious about your results with CQ (vqcomp=1 or vrc_eq=tex, whatever). :wink: |
I have just tested qns=3 with trellis.
Brrr, horrible, encoded at 1 fps, and looks really bad. And it was already advised in man_page... I'll try qns 1 or 2 to see if it does worth, and doesn't slow down encoding. |
Remember that original vrc_eq is tex^qComp, so:
tex^0=1 tex^1=tex So vrc_eq=tex is the same as vqcomp=1 vrc_eq=1 is the same as vqcomp=0 if the vrc_eq formula is the default one. Bilu |
A benchmark I found:
http://www1.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/m...er/039821.html And a nice link about parameters: http://www.ee.oulu.fi/~tuukkat/mplay...ts/readme.html Seems to me that qns is CPU expensive and qprd is crappy. Bilu |
First test (anime low-motion)
Vqcomp=0 ======= 10240 KB avg 3792/4.62 peak 6975/13.18 Vqcomp=1 ======= 10213 KB avg 3782/4.66 peak 6972/13.38 So this test worked the opposite way :) Will do another with live video. Bilu |
Second test (movie low-motion, high detail):
vqcomp=0 ======= 14604 KB 5868/4.35 vqcomp=1 ======= 14616 KB 5873/4.33 So this time won vqcomp=1, by numbers. Having a look at the Bitrate Viewer graphics I almost couldn't distinguish each other. They are different, but difference is so little it is hard to see. Bilu |
The only thing left to test in your command-line is:
cmp=2:subcmp=2:predia=-2:dia=-2 Will have a look at it when possible, but I've read in the links I posted that larger diamonds is not necessarily good, even negative ones. Bilu |
Quote:
Don't know what is it supposed to be doing, but file generated at both values look blocky. I'll drop it by now. I still didn't have time to test your last settings, sorry. Quote:
And your comparison refers to BitrateViewer analysis, what about the visual quality to your eyes?. If vqcomp=1 and vqcomp=0, at the same vbitrate, give the same result (filesize, avg and max bitrates, avg and max Q, and visual quality), then I'll have to say that I don't understand a word my friend. :roll: EDIT: 2 doubts else left: Are you still using vrc_maxrate=9800 for both vqcomp=0 and =1?, since in my tests this raised quality, no blocks, but bigger filesizes of course. And, are you using vqmin at default (=2). The same comentary I did before applies to this one. Did you give lmin=2.5 (for vqmin=3) and lmax=11 (for vqmax=10) a try?. When I was close to my limits (in filesize) they removed many blocks. |
@all
I'd like some feedback about dvdauthor, dvdunauthor and spuunmux. Please post here if you have experience with that software. http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=68222#68222 @vmesquita Would like your opinion too ;) Seems to me that we're coming into a command-line cross-platform DVD authoring era :) Bilu |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.