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. |
12th January 2019, 12:24 | #6621 | Link |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,346
|
If you rely on a specific setting that strongly, you should not rely on it being the default, and just specify it. Or as an alternative, not blindly update your encode pipeline without verifying that it still produces expected results.
For the record, the default was changed from 1 to 2, not the other way around.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders |
12th January 2019, 12:35 | #6622 | Link | |
Pig on the wing
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 5,733
|
Quote:
__________________
And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes I'll see you on the dark side of the Moon... |
|
12th January 2019, 12:48 | #6623 | Link |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,346
|
Personally I like the second option. Not blindly update, but validate new versions first.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders |
12th January 2019, 12:56 | #6624 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,277
|
Still waiting for them to update the documentation https://x265.readthedocs.io/en/latest/presets.html,..
Opened an issue entry for it (https://bitbucket.org/multicoreware/...-documentation) at the end of last year. I get it that they change the defaults(/presets/tune) from time to time, but not updating the documentation do represent such fundamental changes is really annoying,... |
12th January 2019, 13:10 | #6625 | Link |
Pig on the wing
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 5,733
|
And a funny thing is that --no-rskip is supposed to be a default in --preset veryslow (and also --slower) but it's not according to the code. I reported the issue a long time ago but no one fixed it Doesn't matter to me though, I use --rskip all the time anyway.
__________________
And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes I'll see you on the dark side of the Moon... |
12th January 2019, 13:26 | #6626 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,277
|
@Boulder: yeah, looking at https://bitbucket.org/multicoreware/...cpp?at=default rskip is only disabled in placebo,
but the documentation: - https://x265.readthedocs.io/en/latest/presets.html reports that is is disabled starting with slower. - https://x265.readthedocs.io/en/default/presets.html reports that is is disabled starting with very slow. -> wrong documentation is even worse than missing documentation (same for https://bitbucket.org/multicoreware/....cpp?at=latest) |
12th January 2019, 14:29 | #6627 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 240
|
ok... can you tell me why aq mode 2 is better? i noticed rapid lower bitrate with aq-mode 2... any impact on picture quality and fine detail retention? i am encoding with crf18
__________________
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, 32GB DDR4-3200 CL16, RTX 3060, 2TB NVMe PCIE4.0, NAS with 8x16TB HDD |
12th January 2019, 14:44 | #6628 | Link | |
Pig on the wing
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 5,733
|
Quote:
I think you need to find a new sweet spot for CRF since the bitrate demand is indeed quite different compared to mode 1, and I also think it depends heavily on the content.
__________________
And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes I'll see you on the dark side of the Moon... |
|
12th January 2019, 17:57 | #6630 | Link | |
Lost my old account :(
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 325
|
Quote:
I think you are correct, since the biggest benefit of reducing it only appears when going above arround 8C/16T (I was testing with 12/24 and went from 7fps to 11fps cause of the less thread utilization at CTU 64, and I would say that it was definitely was worth the trade off), it does makes since to keep it as an manual setting. I would say though that it might be worth consideration to lower the merange for those fastets presets, since it doesnt seem to benefit quality that much. Last edited by excellentswordfight; 12th January 2019 at 17:59. |
|
13th January 2019, 14:40 | #6631 | Link |
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 6,782
|
That might sound stupid to a German (Doofi ~ retarded kid)
I am old! _ Some on-topic: Support for Dolby Vision is announced, and immediately people believe that applications for decoding, possibly even encoding, for consumer PCs are available too ... which is doubtful. I wonder how "homeopathic" its additional features will be in a generic furnished living room, where average people can hardly tell the difference between DD AC3 and dts on a DVD Video, not to mention HD Audio formats. To me, it seems that supporting such data is mainly for professional content producers. Might be a field where hobbyists can't help the developers much. |
13th January 2019, 14:55 | #6632 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,565
|
Quote:
|
|
15th January 2019, 03:00 | #6635 | Link |
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 6,782
|
No. I believe because GPU features would not speed x265 up. At least not without risking a loss of quality or losing the independence from hardware and software platforms (portability).
GPU features are not magical general speed-ups for every case of use, sometimes they just don't match the requirements. |
15th January 2019, 09:55 | #6636 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 240
|
Ok. Did a test. 3840x2160 res., same x265 settings. One with aq-mode 1 crf18 and second aq-mode 2 (which is now new default) with crf16. aq-mode 2 with crf16 still gives lower bitrate. which one "should" be better in terms of detail retention?
whole CLI (HDR parameters are added automatically by RipBot264): Code:
-preset slow --profile main10 --level-idc 5.1 --output-depth 10 --ctu 32 --aq-mode 1 --amp --no-rskip --qg-size 8 --vbv-bufsize 160000 --vbv-maxrate 160000 --bframes 8 --rc-lookahead 48 --gop-lookahead 30 --hdr --hdr-opt --repeat-headers --no-info --no-deblock --no-sao --allow-non-conformance --no-strong-intra-smoothing --high-tier --asm avx512 --crf 18 Code:
-preset slow --profile main10 --level-idc 5.1 --output-depth 10 --ctu 32 --aq-mode 2 --amp --no-rskip --qg-size 8 --vbv-bufsize 160000 --vbv-maxrate 160000 --bframes 8 --rc-lookahead 48 --gop-lookahead 30 --hdr --hdr-opt --repeat-headers --no-info --no-deblock --no-sao --allow-non-conformance --no-strong-intra-smoothing --high-tier --asm avx512 --crf 16
__________________
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, 32GB DDR4-3200 CL16, RTX 3060, 2TB NVMe PCIE4.0, NAS with 8x16TB HDD Last edited by jlpsvk; 16th January 2019 at 12:05. |
15th January 2019, 10:10 | #6637 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,462
|
Having an HD Amp myself, trust me, you can hear de difference! Try listening to Blade Runner, the Final Cut, with full HD audio, or the same movie, just with DD5.1, and I guarantee you that everything below HD audio will sound crap from there on in.
__________________
Gorgeous, delicious, deculture! |
15th January 2019, 10:53 | #6638 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 89
|
Quote:
How do you know both mixes are based on the same mastering? How do you know the DD-mix is not willingly different/worse than the HD mix? Are you comparing identical speaker layouts (both just 5.1)? Are you sure there is no dynamic compression in the DD-mix? Are the volume levels identical? Is the DD-mix limited in bitrate (384/448) or does it use the full 640kbit/s potential? If you want a comparison of codec audio quality only, try encoding your own DD-mix from the HD-audio stream, considering all the factors above. Even then, you cannot be sure in case of AC-3, because people claim that the original, commercial encoder is superior to those available freely... |
|
15th January 2019, 11:01 | #6639 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,462
|
Quote:
__________________
Gorgeous, delicious, deculture! |
|
15th January 2019, 12:12 | #6640 | Link |
Lost my old account :(
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 325
|
Cause 48Khz 16bit audio is very much sufficient for human hearing, and if you have enough experience of audio compression you know that there is several codecs that can achive very close to transperent audio with say 64kbps per channel (and most formats are above that!). I've encoded several surround tracks form lossless to multiple formats, you be surprised how little it affects hearable fidelity.
With that said, I'm sure that the HD-track sounds better for you, but most of that doesnt come from the higher specs (sample rate, bit depth and losslessness) Last edited by excellentswordfight; 15th January 2019 at 12:17. |
|
|