Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 7th November 2018, 11:15   #21  |  Link
jonatans
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShortKatz View Post
Hi jonatans, how can I build a version of ffmpeg that supports xvc? I would need it for Mac and would like to include this ffmpeg in my version of HandBrake than. Thanks.
Thanks ShortKatz. It would be great if you can include support for xvc in your HandBrake version. We have made the ffmpeg version available here: https://github.com/perher/FFmpeg/tree/release/4.0-xvc

We will also push some changes, probably later today, to the xvc repo (https://github.com/divideon/xvc) with the most recent modifications related to the binding with ffmpeg. I will let you know when it's available and provide some instructions for building.
__________________
Jonatan Samuelsson
Co-founder and CEO at Divideon

www.divideon.com | xvc.io
jonatans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th November 2018, 11:27   #22  |  Link
jonatans
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emulgator View Post
Second that. That 851kbit/s file blew my socks off.
Thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emulgator View Post
How was encoding time if I may ask ?
I didn't capture the exact encoding time but if I recall correctly it was in the order of 24 hours per encode on my 4-core laptop (which would correspond to an average encoding speed of 0.2 fps).
__________________
Jonatan Samuelsson
Co-founder and CEO at Divideon

www.divideon.com | xvc.io
jonatans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th November 2018, 11:43   #23  |  Link
jonatans
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 55
The xvc repo has been updated with the latest changes related to integration with ffmpeg: https://github.com/divideon/xvc/commits/master

As mentioned in an earlier post, the ffmpeg version with xvc support is available here: https://github.com/perher/FFmpeg/tree/release/4.0-xvc

That ffmpeg version can be built using the normal process (e.g. as described at https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/CompilationGuide/Ubuntu) with the additional steps of checking out and building xvc:
Code:
cd ~/ffmpeg_sources && \
git -C xvc pull 2> /dev/null || git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/divideon/xvc && \
mkdir xvc_build && \
cd xvc_build && \
PATH="$HOME/bin:$PATH" cmake -G "Unix Makefiles" -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX="$HOME/ffmpeg_build" -DBUILD_TESTS=OFF ../xvc && \
PATH="$HOME/bin:$PATH" make && \
make install
And then add --enable-libxvc when building ffmpeg.

We have not tested integration with HandBrake which as far as I understand would require creation of a new module definition for xvc in HandBrake's contrib folder.
__________________
Jonatan Samuelsson
Co-founder and CEO at Divideon

www.divideon.com | xvc.io
jonatans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2018, 17:27   #24  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,425
Quote:
I didn't capture the exact encoding time but if I recall correctly it was in the order of 24 hours per encode on my 4-core laptop (which would correspond to an average encoding speed of 0.2 fps).
Cool now we just need dual EPYC (ROME) 128C/256T and we can start thinking about encoding our movie collections with amazing ~7 fps ...

Last edited by Atak_Snajpera; 10th November 2018 at 17:29.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th November 2018, 18:50   #25  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 3,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
Cool now we just need dual EPYC (ROME) 128C/256T and we can start thinking about encoding our movie collections with amazing ~7 fps ...
THAT would be an amazing degree of parallelization!
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2018, 11:10   #26  |  Link
Wishbringer
Silent Reader
 
Wishbringer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 292
With mentioned settings in 1st post, that parallelization isn't possible.
Hanging at 50% utilization with an Ryzen 2700x
Increased to 95% with -ctu 32 and -merange 26 (at FullHD).
The highend quality settings aren't optimized for parallelism.

Edit: oops xvc, not x265... sorry (have no experience with xvc, maybe parallelization is there much better)

Last edited by Wishbringer; 13th November 2018 at 11:12.
Wishbringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2018, 15:24   #27  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
THAT would be an amazing degree of parallelization!
Easy if you divide movie in chunks...
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2018, 17:12   #28  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 3,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
Easy if you divide movie in chunks...
There are a lot of downsides to doing a lot of chunks on a small clip without a reasonably sophisticated control system. Generally fixed Closed GOPs. And VBV around the stitch points has to be conservative.

Obviously it CAN be done, but it limits the peak efficiency somewhat.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2018, 18:24   #29  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 3,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonatans View Post
Thanks!
I didn't capture the exact encoding time but if I recall correctly it was in the order of 24 hours per encode on my 4-core laptop (which would correspond to an average encoding speed of 0.2 fps).
That's about the encoding time I got on a 6-core system using --preset placebo --subme 7 --cu-lossless --tskip --me sea

I'll do a test encode to the same ABR this weekend with all the whistles on and see what x265 can do. Probably not as good, but it'd be nice to have an apples-to-apples comparison.

Still hoping someone will provide their best-effort AV1 and/or VP9 encodes!
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2018, 10:14   #30  |  Link
SmilingWolf
I am maddo saientisto!
 
SmilingWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
Still hoping someone will provide their best-effort AV1 and/or VP9 encodes!
I could try a VP9 encode, but I have absolutely no idea what a best effort vpxenc cmdline would look like. Even the MSU preset from the 2017 report doesn't help, since most of the knobs they set are defaults anyway, while some others just go on blindly favoring blurring. Plus, they set --cpu-used to 1, so I don't really know what to think about those settings.

In a recent set of tests I run I used this:
Code:
vpxenc --codec=vp9 --frame-parallel=0 --tile-columns=2 --good --cpu-used=0 --tune=psnr --passes=2 --threads=2 --end-usage=q --cq-level={} --test-decode=fatal --ivf -o test.vp9.cq{}.ivf orig.i420.y4m
Perhaps I could set --tile-columns to 0 and call it a day.

EDIT: just to make sure, I'm downloading the ToS_1920x800_xdither.7z file. Is this good for the test?

Last edited by SmilingWolf; 17th November 2018 at 15:28.
SmilingWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2018, 17:43   #31  |  Link
rwill
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 18
https://1drv.ms/v/s!AuR0uLTdXhL-bHDTK8EQR8MZKxs
https://1drv.ms/v/s!AuR0uLTdXhL-bbn61I4WUO3vouY
https://1drv.ms/v/s!AuR0uLTdXhL-btPdKqFN4UHhpjY

Mpeg2 for shits and giggles.
rwill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2018, 15:21   #32  |  Link
SmilingWolf
I am maddo saientisto!
 
SmilingWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 103
libvpx (VP9) 1.7.0-1363-gfa1e85b09
ffmpeg -i ToS_1920x800_xdither.y4m -c:v libvpx-vp9 -enable-tpl true -row-mt false -tile-columns 0 -tile-rows 0 -auto-alt-ref 1 -frame-parallel false -cpu-used 0 -deadline good -b:v <1/1.5/2>M -maxrate 4M -bufsize 12M -g 120 -pass 2 <outfile.mkv>

1M (937 kb/s): https://mega.nz/#!Q1wF0Q6Z!hv5R2ZECI...7r8YoadlVH8cAI
1.5M (1400 kb/s): https://mega.nz/#!I451lSpD!P3pYAUzMw...0WXme2YkEdsESs
2M (1931 kb/s): https://mega.nz/#!F4phRQBZ!RG_bsXj3n...g8hSlY03CrI1ks

It gets especially bad around the 5:00 mark. Also, that "halo" effect which surrounds moving objects is really really annoying

Last edited by SmilingWolf; 26th November 2018 at 20:40.
SmilingWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2018, 11:08   #33  |  Link
jonatans
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 55
I created a lower bitrate xvc encode as well.

This one is below 0.5 mbps (462 kbps) but still I think it keeps it together quite ok.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1i2...LAHbfQnGIDksUO

You need a player with xvc support to play it (such as the ffplay build from my earlier post: https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.p...84#post1855884)

It took 20 hours to encode on my 4 core desktop computer.
__________________
Jonatan Samuelsson
Co-founder and CEO at Divideon

www.divideon.com | xvc.io
jonatans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2018, 22:14   #34  |  Link
jethro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 100
2Mbit is definitely watchable
jethro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2018, 23:39   #35  |  Link
SeeMoreDigital
Life looks better in UHD
 
SeeMoreDigital's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Notts, UK
Posts: 11,646
How about MPEG-1
__________________
| I've been testing hardware media playback devices and software A/V encoders and decoders since 2001 | My Network Layout & A/V Gear |
SeeMoreDigital is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st November 2018, 20:53   #36  |  Link
SmilingWolf
I am maddo saientisto!
 
SmilingWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 103
libaom 1.0.0-943-ga7f959f06
aomenc --frame-parallel=0 --tile-columns=1 --auto-alt-ref=1 --cpu-used=4 --tune=psnr --passes=2 --pass=2 --fpf=<file.log> --threads=2 --end-usage=vbr --target-bitrate=1000 --maxsection-pct=400 --buf-sz=12000 --kf-max-dist=120 --test-decode=fatal --ivf -o <file.ivf> <file.y4m>

0.5M (484 kb/s): https://mega.nz/#!1owA1CaB!NHTMNqAS6...q213Bq5D2fLbLI
1M (921 kb/s): https://mega.nz/#!so5SUSCB!79tHA8d78...byXW7mYInkS5rQ
1.5M (1364 kb/s): https://mega.nz/#!MggEgQzA!71cMBPcjP...iIlZ7GG6330B3Q

The aomenc CLI requires an unholy mix of times, percents and bitrates and it took tre different manuals to understand which options I needed, so I can only hope the encoded files honor the limits imposed by the challenge.
Seriously, this thing needs a proper manual

Last edited by SmilingWolf; 23rd November 2018 at 09:17.
SmilingWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2018, 13:12   #37  |  Link
rwill
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeeMoreDigital View Post
How about MPEG-1
For progressive content MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 are very similar. then again resolutions larger than 352x288 and bitrates higher than 1.25Mbit are only in MPEG-2 profiles and levels as far as is know. That does not mean that unconstrained MPEG-1 video would not be able to reach almost the same quality as MPEG-2 video. The standards are only 2 years apart ( 1992 and 1994 ? ).

Now H.261 from 1989 would be interesting but it only supports QCIF and CIF resolutions without standard breaking modifications.
rwill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2018, 18:45   #38  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 3,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwill View Post
For progressive content MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 are very similar. then again resolutions larger than 352x288 and bitrates higher than 1.25Mbit are only in MPEG-2 profiles and levels as far as is know. That does not mean that unconstrained MPEG-1 video would not be able to reach almost the same quality as MPEG-2 video. The standards are only 2 years apart ( 1992 and 1994 ? ).

Now H.261 from 1989 would be interesting but it only supports QCIF and CIF resolutions without standard breaking modifications.
I tried some MPEG-1 encodes, actually, and they were recognizable but pretty dreadful. Also MPEG-2 ASP, which were not all that much better. And VC-1 dynamic resolution Smooth Streaming, which was surprisingly robust, but still well short of H.264. And plays back correctly in hardly anything.

VP9 and VVC are the ones I’m most interested in adding to the hopper. And maybe we should add a 750 Kbps version based on the excellent showing of xvc?
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book

Last edited by benwaggoner; 26th November 2018 at 18:46. Reason: SmilingWolf gave us AV1!
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2018, 22:35   #39  |  Link
easyfab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 327
I just tried the first 1500 frames with AV1 @1000 kb/s. aomenc is really slow 34 fpm ( cpu-used 4 )

Here the file is someone is interested to see the result : https://www.sendspace.com/file/dcf6ii

peharps I'll try to encode it entirely if I find some time.

Last edited by easyfab; 26th November 2018 at 22:38.
easyfab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2018, 15:18   #40  |  Link
SaurusX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 81
Benwaggoner, I'm sure you know, but Amazon is considered the gold standard for video encodes often times beating out blu-ray. Now that I've buttered you up, I have a question: What's your opinion on using HEVC and animation? As it is, there is no animation tune given by the x265 developers and it appears it's because the combination of hard edges, flat cels, grain, and detailed backgrounds tends to throw HEVC for a loop. There are a few dedicated scene groups with their own "optimized" encoder settings, but none have really seemed to get it. Has Amazon "gotten it"?
SaurusX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:20.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.