BD Rebuilder Beta - Bug Reports Only

[Michi]

BD-Rebuilder.ini:

[Options]
VERSION=0.61.0.5
MODE=0
ENCODER_MENU=1
ENCODE_QUALITY=5
ONEPASS_ENCODING=2
AUTO_QUALITY=0
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=deu;gem;ger;
SUBS_TO_KEEP=deu;gem;ger;gmh;goh;gsw;
SD_CONVERT=0
OPEN_GOP=1
RESIZE_1080=0
DEINTERLACE=0
SD_TO_1080=0
CONVERT_WIDE=0
DTS_REENCODE=0
AC3_REENCODE=0
AC3_640=0
AC3_192=0
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=1
AVCHD=0
REMOVE_WORKFILES=1
MOVIE_ONLY_LOOP=1
REMOVE_OUTPUT=1
USE_FILTERS=0
BDMV_CERT_ONLY=0
USE_LAVF=1
IVTC_PULLDOWN=0
ASSUME_DVD_PAL=0
UNMASK_CHAPTER=0
COMPLETION_BEEP=0
DGDECNV=0
AUDIO_TRACK_LIMIT=0
SUBTITLE_TRACK_LIMIT=0
CUSTOM_TARGET_SIZE=66000
TARGET_SIZE=23200
AUTO_BURN=2
MOVIEONLY_TYPE=40
ALTCRF=18
ARCHIVE_265=1
ARCHIVE_AUDIO=100	
ARCHIVE_CRF=16		
ARCHIVE_ENABLE=1	
ARCHIVE_LIMIT=1
ALT_TARGET=7800
ALTMETHOD=0
ALTAUTOCROP=0
QUICK_EXTRAS=0
OUTPUT_3D=0
RESIZE_1440=0
RESIZE_720=0
NEROAAC=0
SUPTITLE=0
IGNORE_3D=0
OUTPUT_SBS=0
ENCODER_MENU=1
HC_PROFILE=BEST	
IMPORT_HEVC_INTACT=1
MIN_M2TS_SIZE=20
NEW_CRF_PREDICTION=1
MULTIPROCESS=0
THREADS=auto
BD5_SIZE=4520		
BD9_SIZE=8200		
BD25_SIZE=23200	
QUALITY_ULTRA=1





FRIMSOURCE=0
ENCODER=0
DGDECIM=1
FRIM_SW_DECODE=1
FRIM_SW_ENCODE=1
PRIORITY_CLASS=1
MENU_BACKGROUND=C:\BD_Rebuilder\misc\menuback.jpg
IMPORT_THRESHOLD=15
QUICK_PLAY_THRESHOLD=10
MENU_AUTO_BACKGROUND=1
MENU_PLAY_SEQUENTIAL=0
MENU_START_WITH_MENU=1
DECODER=0
AUDIO_DRC=0
MENU_AUTO_DVDAUDIO=1
IMPORT_LIMIT_LANG=0
IMPORT_KEEP_PLAYALL=0
ALT_CRF_TARGET=4000
PGSTOSRT=0
UHD_MAXRATE=60000
UHD_VBV_BUFFER=60000
TWEAK_X265=--no-open-gop --no-sao --no-slow-firstpass --no-rskip --subme 4 --weightb --ctu 32

[Paths]
SOURCE_PATH=F:\4K\
WORKING_PATH=Q:\4K\

[jfcarbel]

Updating to latest build and been using NeroAAC in past due to quality, But wondering if this is still case. Is the built in one now just as good if not better?

Also building a new Ryzen 3900X system, is MULTIPROCESS setting even needed anymore as I seem to recall that both x264 and x265 and multi-threaded by default.

[BuddTX]

JDobbs, I would also be interested in a future version of BD Rebuilder with NVEnc/NVEncC or similar nVidia GPU Hardware encoding for 4K/UHD x265 encoding.

I did a test with the evaluation version of CloneBD using x265 and NVEnc and it took about 30 minutes to make a MKV using the highest settings, whereas the same source took over a day using BD 61.05 and x265. this is NOT A COMPLAINT at all, I love BD Rebuilder! I am very appreciative of all you have done!

While I have an older PC (10 years old!), it is still a powerhouse, it is a 6 core Intel Xeon W3680 3.33 Ghz, 12 cores with hyperthreading, 24 gig of triple channel ram, and two SSD hard drives. The video card I have is a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 TI. Still using W7 if that matters.

Thank you!

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by BuddTX

JDobbs, I would also be interested in a future version of BD Rebuilder with NVEnc/NVEncC or similar nVidia GPU Hardware encoding for 4K/UHD x265 encoding.

I did a test with the evaluation version of CloneBD using x265 and NVEnc and it took about 30 minutes to make a MKV using the highest settings, whereas the same source took over a day using BD 61.05 and x265. this is NOT A COMPLAINT at all, I love BD Rebuilder! I am very appreciative of all you have done!

While I have an older PC (10 years old!), it is still a powerhouse, it is a 6 core Intel Xeon W3680 3.33 Ghz, 12 cores with hyperthreading, 24 gig of triple channel ram, and two SSD hard drives. The video card I have is a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 TI. Still using W7 if that matters.

Thank you!

In order to build and test it I need to have an Nvidia card that supports it. Right now with donations virtually non-existent I have a hard time justifying the cost to myself. Not trying to jockey for donations, just stating the facts.

[cartman0208]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

In order to build and test it I need to have an Nvidia card that supports it. Right now with donations virtually non-existent I have a hard time justifying the cost to myself. Not trying to jockey for donations, just stating the facts.

If you don't mind missing some of the newer features like 8k and B-Frame support and 4k 4:4:4 and lossless support, I could send you my spare GTX960 ...

I just looked up shipping prices to US and its less than I feared

[MrVideo]

I think it needs to be a GTX-1050, or better, for HEVC hardware encoding support.

The GTX-1050 has the 2176p issue. AIUI, it needs to be a RTX-20xx to get 2160p support (a turing card).

[MrVideo]

Jdobbs: There is currently an unbranded GTX-1050 on E-bay for $80. I'll be happy to buy it and sent it to you. Just let me know right away before it goes away.

[cartman0208]

Originally Posted by MrVideo

I think it needs to be a GTX-1050, or better, for HEVC hardware encoding support.

The GTX-1050 has the 2176p issue. AIUI, it needs to be a RTX-20xx to get 2160p support (a turing card).

Doesn't need to be a RTX... GTX1660 is also Turing (I've got one), but starts around $200

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by MrVideo

Jdobbs: There is currently an unbranded GTX-1050 on E-bay for $80. I'll be happy to buy it and sent it to you. Just let me know right away before it goes away.

I appreciate it. But I'll just wait until I can afford a Turing card. I want to be able to encode with B frames.

I'll probably end up buying one soon enough. My will power for frugality is pretty lame.

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by cartman0208

Doesn't need to be a RTX... GTX1660 is also Turing (I've got one), but starts around $200

Yeah. I was thinking about a GTX1660 or GTX1660 ti, and that's around the price point I've been seeing too. Have you done any HEVC encoding with it? Opinion?

[MrVideo]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

Yeah. I was thinking about a GTX1660 or GTX1660 ti

How about I get you this one: http://www.ebay.com/itm/EVGA-GeForce...MAAOSwgiVeN0~T

[MrVideo]

Originally Posted by cartman0208

Doesn't need to be a RTX... GTX1660 is also Turing (I've got one), but starts around $200

Thanks for the update.

[cartman0208]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

Yeah. I was thinking about a GTX1660 or GTX1660 ti, and that's around the price point I've been seeing too. Have you done any HEVC encoding with it? Opinion?

Yep, I just uploaded some Samples with different CRF, let the video enthusiasts decide ... I can't see much of a difference ... even at a tenth of the original filesize.
The encoding for each file took less than 10 seconds, but the secondary stream from the orignal is lost in the samples
Original.mkv - 270MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP14.mkv - 207MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP18.mkv - 105MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP20.mkv - 75MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP22.mkv - 53MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP24.mkv - 38MB

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by cartman0208

Yep, I just uploaded some Samples with different CRF, let the video enthusiasts decide ... I can't see much of a difference ... even at a tenth of the original filesize.
The encoding for each file took less than 10 seconds, but the secondary stream from the orignal is lost in the samples
Original.mkv - 270MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP14.mkv - 207MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP18.mkv - 105MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP20.mkv - 75MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP22.mkv - 53MB
H265Main10High10bitLvl5.1QP24.mkv - 38MB

Thanks!

I'll take a look at these, and I'll also do some PSNR and SSIM comparisons.

[Edit] You're right... you'd never guess by looking that the 38MB file was compressed that much more than the 270MB original.

[gonca]

Originally Posted by MrVideo

I think it needs to be a GTX-1050, or better, for HEVC hardware encoding support.

The GTX-1050 has the 2176p issue. AIUI, it needs to be a RTX-20xx to get 2160p support (a turing card).

A GTX-10xx will do 4k, no B frames on HEVC though

[Sharc]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

Thanks!

I'll take a look at these, and I'll also do some PSNR and SSIM comparisons.

[Edit] You're right... you'd never guess by looking that the 38MB file was compressed that much more than the 270MB original.

Well, the smoothing (loss of details) is obvious when you step through the frames in interleaved mode. It doesn't mean that the compressed version is not pleasant to view, it just looks like a denoised original and loss of details in low contrast areas.
Comparisons with SSIM, PSNR and VMAF have already been posted in doom9, but one has definitely to make his own tests and optimize encoder settings, like constant quality versus constant quantizer etc. for ffmpeg NVEnc or rigaya's NVEncC.
One 'problem' I see with HW encoding is that BD-RB would have to analyze the user's HW in order to suggest the appropriate encoder settings.

[cartman0208]

Originally Posted by Sharc

Well, the smoothing (loss of details) is obvious when you step through the frames in interleaved mode. It doesn't mean that the compressed version is not pleasant to view, it just looks like a denoised original and loss of details in low contrast areas.
Comparisons with SSIM, PSNR and VMAF have already been posted in doom9, but one has definitely to make his own tests and optimize encoder settings, like constant quality versus constant quantizer etc. for ffmpeg NVEnc or rigaya's NVEncC.
One 'problem' I see with HW encoding is that BD-RB would have to analyze the user's HW in order to suggest the appropriate encoder settings.

I can't repeat it enough: the main reason for HW encoding is speed ... Usually my 4K encodes with medium to high settings run at 1-2 fps ... HW does the same with over 60 fps

[Sharc]

Originally Posted by cartman0208

I can't repeat it enough: the main reason for HW encoding is speed ...

Sure, I know. There is little other good reason to prefer HW over SW encoding. Also keep in mind if CPU demanding avisynth scripts get involved the overall speed gain can significantly drop.
I do not at all argue against HW encoding. The speed/quality/compression compromise has always been a personal decision .

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by Sharc

Sure, I know. There is little other good reason to prefer HW over SW encoding. Also keep in mind if CPU demanding avisynth scripts get involved the overall speed gain can significantly drop.
I do not at all argue against HW encoding. The speed/quality/compression compromise has always been a personal decision .

Exactly. Right now BD-RB doesn't offer that choice. Hopefully at some point it will.

One other point. There's also the option to choose the fastest speed for X265 in BD-RB. My guess would be that it is similar to hardware encoding in quality -- and is a lot faster than, say, the default "High Quality" mode in BD-RB. Even on my old AMD FX-8350 I can get 5-7 fps with that setting. It still takes 8-10 hours to encode -- but it doesn't require a $200 investment in a new video card.

One 'problem' I see with HW encoding is that BD-RB would have to analyze the user's HW in order to suggest the appropriate encoder settings.

Does anyone know if the Nvidia API or FFMPEG/NVENC offer ways to report the capabilities of existing Nvidia hardware? That's one problem I foresee with support for HW encoding -- it changes so much that it could become a full-time job just trying to keep up with it. The Nvidia support matrix shows the variety of cards and capabilities that you might have to support.

[Sharc]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

...Does anyone know if the Nvidia API or FFMPEG/NVENC offer ways to report the capabilities of existing Nvidia hardware? That's one problem I foresee with support for HW encoding -- it changes so much that it could become a full-time job just trying to keep up with it. The Nvidia support matrix shows the variety of cards and capabilities that you might have to support.

I only know for NVEncC:

NVEncC.exe --check-features

I didn't find something similar for ffmpeg.