KVCD: the perfect CQ after prediction?
 

8)

for lazy people (like me), that want to know the perfect CQ after prediction:

Finding Nemo (movie and credits)
forced film
352 X 240
Mpeg1
Motion Estimate Search (fast)
CQ=80
HeadAC3he = 128 / 44 or 48 (your choice)

Kwag's script ( + levels ) :

undot()
Limiter()
asharp(1, 4)
Levels(0,1.04,255,0,255) # i like little levels :-)
BicubicResize(352,180,0.0,0.6)
#STMedianFilter(3, 3, 1, 1 ) # was faster without STMedian
MergeChroma(blur(1.5))
MergeLuma(blur(0.1))
ScriptClip(" nf = YDifferenceToNext()" +chr(13)+ "unfilter( -(fmin(round(nf)*2, 100)), -(fmin(round(nf)*2, 100)) ).TemporalSoften( fmin( round(2/nf), 6), round(1/nf) , round(3/nf) , 1, 1) ")
AddBorders(0,30,0,30)
Limiter()
function fmin( int f1, int f2) {
return ( f1<f2 ) ? f1 : f2
}

final = 807Mb (little overburn)
vcdeasy...chapters. burn the image with nero in 700MB cd-r !

result:
8O
me, my wife, my kid and my friend can't see differences from dvd !
if i play the dvd and change to the KVCD in my Philips 29,
:arrow: they don't know "who is who" :!:
8)

don't believe?
follow this steps and post your result!
:wink:

I think thats unbelieveable because of the resolution.
And also with a CQ of 100 you have to see differences. :?
Perhaps you have a handheld TV so I believe you. :lol: :D :wink:

Post some Pics @ the same size. 8)

i don't know how post the pictures but if you want,
i can send to your mail 1,2 or 10 MBs from my encode. choose the size!
do you want?
pm with your mail and post the sample here,after i send to you!
:wink:

for this reason i wrote:
"don't believe?
follow this steps and post your result! "
:arrow: they don't know "who is who" :!:

:idea:
you can do a sample using trim in the end of the script too!
:arrow: just follow exact like i posted!

your choice.....a mail with a sample or you will do your own sample
:?:
:?
:wink:

Jorel my friend,
I do belive you did a very good encoding, but the DVD Resolution is 720x480 in your country, .... ok 352x240 in CQ80 is very excellent but for shure recognisable unsharper. OR your source already comes that unsharp that downscaling to 352x240 won't matter, but I'm def. not shure about this :wink:

inc, i know about that resolutions :wink:
i don't have your knowledge my friend but i work with tvs at 30 years!
i know what i'm talking about, believe me. :)
i know the "weight" and the "responsability" of what i posted!

i have the original dvd and the new kvcd that i did hours ago!
you, Kwag, and some more "monsters" of quality can see easily but
they can't see anything different!!!
i wrote:
:arrow: they don't know "who is who" :!:
puf,puf...i'm tired to wrote the same phrase! :lol:

@ all:
pictures don't show the real quality, but samples show.
:arrow: who want a sample,PLEASE,pm with the mail and choose the mb size !

burn in cdrw call your friends and family and ask:
is dvd or kvcd?
"we" in the forum can see differences but "they" don't :!:

:wink:
true!

Hi jorel,

Cut a ~2MB piece and E-Mail it to me. I'll post it here ;)

-kwag

ok...in few moments!
thanks!
:D

<edited>

Kwag,
you have mail!
:wink:

@ all:
please,
:arrow: burn in cdr-w and see in the standalone player on tv.....
(call your family and friends if possible)
post your sincere opinion!
:wink:

Here it is: http://www.kvcd.net/NEMO.mpg

-kwag

Oh,... very slow without FlashGet. :cry: :wink:

It's a little bit unsharp. (VCD Resolution :lol: ) But in generel it looks good.. But with 352x240 i would't use ashapr in your script , because it's overshapr and you lost a lot of CQ.

you're right...thanks for recomendations.

but only the "encoder masters" can see big details,
common people don't!
:wink:

Actually, at 352x240, the added sharpness compensates for the lower resolution.
So even though you loose some CQ, the overall quality is better with asharp.
If the CQ was lower, somewhere in the 70's, then I would remove asharp.

-kwag

The movie looks clear and not ovesharpend, nice work jorel and I think even if its a bit unsharper on TV well, .... but on the other hand almost no artefacts at 352x288! :)

!Friends here we do see at frame 307 a nice example for a 352x288 4:2:0 color issue in especially red parts. (nothing to do with you jorel but for YV12 4:2:0 in general anddont think that does base on the MergeChroma(blur) usage ;-) ).

Look at the frame 307 at the left side (seen from the user) of her Hairpart!
You see the double low resolution even ON 352x288 in the chorma channel!
The edge from the hair to the green furniture behind her at the wall. The resolution here is the half of 352x288 (at chroma) then compared to the dentists lamp above right which respects the 352x288.
Chroma in 4:2:0 therefore half horizontal AND half vertical frequency compared to 4:2:2 where there the chroma gots "only" half horizontal frequency.

On the TV you wont see it that much as it will be correctly upsampled by the standalone (but not by your PC Display system as you see)but that also means interpolated, a reason for example why I almost never use 352x288(240) in YV12 mpeg

ok inc!

you wrote:
"Look at the frame 307 at the left side (seen from the user) of her Hairpart! "
and
"On the TV you wont see it that much as it will be correctly upsampled by the standalone (but not by your PC Display system as you see)but that also means interpolated, a reason for example why I almost never use 352x288(240) in YV12 mpeg"

how can common people see this in the tv ?

only in pause and don't looking for the faces ....
(well, i look at the faces when they are talking)
:wink:

if you "almost never use 352x288(240) in YV12 mpeg"
please, send your recomendations inc !
they are welcome my friend!
the target is the best quality in short space !
:wink:

Well common People won't recognise that :wink:
But as 352x240 already comes more blurry, in red edges that will be double "underlined" by chroma frequency issues.
The player does upsample these "stairs", means interpolate, so don't worry ... you like your result and thats it and that counts (Keeping in mind that you also are a person who wants to stuck with best poss. Quality ;-) ).
Thats also a Player thing! Some Players do output worse resizing or Chroma upsampling than others.

There have for example so many issues about some Divx Standalones which do upsample "interlaced" 4:2:0 totally wrong which results even at 720x480 in Chroma Stairs. :arrow: Still telecined Captures burned to CD-R and watched them by the mpeg4 Standalone.

Also we have to keep in mind that 4:2:0/YV12 encodings do not have their purpose in "professional" further editing, thats also why there does exist a mpeg2 4:2:2 Profile ... for at least keeping the choma in full vertical frequency.
Also a reason why Avisynth works faster in case of YV12 cause its 12bit instead of 16bit (YUY2 4:2:2) and besides half horizontal chroma frequency a 4:2:0 also gots a half vertical chroma frequency. Thats why we do have extremly Problems if encoding interlaced Streams to Xvid/divx (while capturing for example) as TWO lines do have share ONE Chroma px.
But 4:2:0 mpeg2 also does work diff. than regular 4:2:0.

Here's a very good explanation (link is temporarely down, but might become online soon, well I hope it ;-) )
http://www.mir.com/DMG/chroma.html

In my encodings I always choose at least full height (576 or in your case 480) as by this you maybe get a few less CQ but on the other hand minimal Artifacts at 352x240 4 Times upscaled (2x width 2x Height) will look the same as bigger artefacts at 480x480 but only resized 2x at width.
And finally on TV quality will (for example if 352x288 results in CQ 80) do come out the same BUT beside this sharper.

Keep in mind that you have to see the resizing upscaling process everytime as a whole! Means even if you resize in your script to vcd or svcd or 1/2 DVD reolutions, ... these finally will be upsized to your final TV screen dimensions.

great inc....great hints!

you're right here too:
"Thats also a Player thing!
Some Players do output worse resizing or Chroma upsampling than others."

yeah...(eletronic was my work inc but i can't find words to explain about it)

i have 2 players and the image is different in each....
and the "old" have more quality ! :o
the "old", is in my kid's room and play 352X240, 480X480 or 7xxX480!
don't work with 5xx, for this reason i did KVCD 352x240.
my kid (me too) can see in all players that we have!
the quality in this player (CCE label) is amazing!

thanks for the link and hints inc... (you're really incredible)!
:wink:

Thanks Jorel! You too.

Well then have a nice time with your kids watching Nemo ! :D

Actually, when you have kids, you have nice time WHILE they are watching Nemo :-) God bless Disney, the babysiter's worst nightmare :-P

thanks inc and Phil !

GOD bless Disney, i really like too much !

.......

:roll:
but in my house, the worse nightmare is the babysiter.....
she is too old!
bawl!
:cry:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I downloaded the mpg file and played it on my PC. It looks great. But it gave me some questions.

When, I make a KVCD and play the MPG file on my PC (using Windows Media Player), I get the black letter box thing on all the four sides. But, in this file you have posted, I dont see the black thingies on the sides (left and right).

How do you get this done? Which part of the script is responsible for that?

I would like to know :)