Avisynth plugins help-PLEASE

hardkorn · 10th January 2009, 06:27

Hi

I test encoded a video. Source is 1920x1080 16:9 interlaced, and I want a standard mpeg2 720x480 output.

I have two captures, before and after, I want to show you. The output looks too choppy. I don't know what to use to smooth it out.
Can you guys lend me a helping hand?

Original

After

Thank you

Guest · 10th January 2009, 06:31

You have to tell us how you processed the video (script) and how you encoded it. We can't read your mind.

hardkorn · 10th January 2009, 06:39

I did as you guided me. No offense there mate. Using CCE, progressive frame ntsc 16:9 using the script given by you.

# PLUGINS
LoadPlugin("I:\AUTHOR\GORDIA~1.2\DGMPGDec\DGDecode.dll")
LoadPlugin("I:\AUTHOR\GORDIA~1.2\AvisynthPlugins\LeakKernelDeint.dll")

MPEG2Source("H:\AAAAAA\segment.d2v",cpu=4)
leakkerneldeint(order=1)
spline36resize(720,480)
I also tried all deinterlace options inside GK' avisynth editor. I also deinterlaced using CCE engine. Same choppy.

But using HcEnc as you said, it looks much much better than using CCE, but still those "blocks" are hurting my eyes. But no more flickering. I'll post a short 3 seconds sample.
I can't believe that from a 1920x1080 the result can be so disastrous.

Thank you.

Sagekilla · 10th January 2009, 06:41

You can safely use a dumb Bob() instead, which will speed up things a little bit.

Can you provide a short (5 - 10 second) sample of the video so we can have a look?

hardkorn · 10th January 2009, 08:15

Here they are

CCE encoded 4PASSES-DEINTERLACED -6580 kbits/s
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=QS21Q75U

And

HCEnc encoded-2PASSES 6580 kbits/s

http://files.filefront.com/HCENCrar/.../fileinfo.html

Thanks

Guest · 10th January 2009, 09:06

I looked at the HC encode and I don't see the artifacts shown in your "After" shot. What blocks are you talking about? You can try raising the bitrate.

hardkorn · 10th January 2009, 10:22

Time: 0:08. Look at the white collar! It's not as smooth as it should be. The bitrate is pretty high.
What about the artifacts produced by CCE? In the first few seconds they are more visible.

*.mp4 guy · 10th January 2009, 10:59

Thats a farily average looking encode. The only real problems it has are the aliasing on the pillars in the first short shot, and the blocking/banding in the background (most visible in the upper right corner behind julie andrews, in the cce encode). There is also some aliasing throughout the encode (I think it is what you are talking about on the white collar), but it is at normal levels, and reducing it would cause other artifacts.

If you are very unhappy with the results you are getting, you could post a sample of the HD footage, and ask for advice on converting it to SD with as few artifacts as possible, and see what people can suggest. However, be warned, most proposed scripts will be significantly slower then what you are using now.

[edit] Also, a more desciptive thread title will get you more usefull replies.

hardkorn · 10th January 2009, 11:26

Thanks for your input *mp4 guy.

Why does CCE give such a bad output comparing to HCEnc? And all that flicker right at the beginning? It was encoded with 4 passes and it's worse than hcenc. I've never had so much problems encoding any footage, ever.

What do you mean by SD? (me->noob)

*.mp4 guy · 10th January 2009, 11:41

HD= high definition 1920 or 1280, by 1080 or 720 pixels
sd= standard definition, 720 by 480 or 576 pixels

both encodes look extremely similar to me, if you are seeing large differences between them, you are doing something wierd.

10th January 2009, 06:27	#1 \| Link
hardkorn Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 73	Avisynth plugins help-PLEASE Hi I test encoded a video. Source is 1920x1080 16:9 interlaced, and I want a standard mpeg2 720x480 output. I have two captures, before and after, I want to show you. The output looks too choppy. I don't know what to use to smooth it out. Can you guys lend me a helping hand? Original After Thank you Last edited by hardkorn; 10th January 2009 at 06:32.

10th January 2009, 06:39	#3 \| Link
hardkorn Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 73	I did as you guided me. No offense there mate. Using CCE, progressive frame ntsc 16:9 using the script given by you. # PLUGINS LoadPlugin("I:\AUTHOR\GORDIA~1.2\DGMPGDec\DGDecode.dll") LoadPlugin("I:\AUTHOR\GORDIA~1.2\AvisynthPlugins\LeakKernelDeint.dll") MPEG2Source("H:\AAAAAA\segment.d2v",cpu=4) leakkerneldeint(order=1) spline36resize(720,480) I also tried all deinterlace options inside GK' avisynth editor. I also deinterlaced using CCE engine. Same choppy. But using HcEnc as you said, it looks much much better than using CCE, but still those "blocks" are hurting my eyes. But no more flickering. I'll post a short 3 seconds sample. I can't believe that from a 1920x1080 the result can be so disastrous. Thank you. Last edited by hardkorn; 10th January 2009 at 06:52.

10th January 2009, 06:41	#4 \| Link
Sagekilla x264aholic Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: New York Posts: 1,752	You can safely use a dumb Bob() instead, which will speed up things a little bit. Can you provide a short (5 - 10 second) sample of the video so we can have a look? __________________ You can't call your encoding speed slow until you start measuring in seconds per frame.

10th January 2009, 11:41	#10 \| Link
*.mp4 guy Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 1,348	HD= high definition 1920 or 1280, by 1080 or 720 pixels sd= standard definition, 720 by 480 or 576 pixels both encodes look extremely similar to me, if you are seeing large differences between them, you are doing something wierd. Last edited by .mp4 guy; 10th January 2009 at 11:54. Reason: typo*

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10th January 2009, 06:31	#2 \| Link
Guest Guest Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 21,901	You have to tell us how you processed the video (script) and how you encoded it. We can't read your mind.

10th January 2009, 08:15	#5 \| Link
hardkorn Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 73	Here they are CCE encoded 4PASSES-DEINTERLACED -6580 kbits/s http://www.megaupload.com/?d=QS21Q75U And HCEnc encoded-2PASSES 6580 kbits/s http://files.filefront.com/HCENCrar/.../fileinfo.html Thanks

10th January 2009, 09:06	#6 \| Link
Guest Guest Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 21,901	I looked at the HC encode and I don't see the artifacts shown in your "After" shot. What blocks are you talking about? You can try raising the bitrate.

10th January 2009, 10:22	#7 \| Link
hardkorn Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 73	Time: 0:08. Look at the white collar! It's not as smooth as it should be. The bitrate is pretty high. What about the artifacts produced by CCE? In the first few seconds they are more visible.

10th January 2009, 10:59	#8 \| Link
*.mp4 guy Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 1,348	Thats a farily average looking encode. The only real problems it has are the aliasing on the pillars in the first short shot, and the blocking/banding in the background (most visible in the upper right corner behind julie andrews, in the cce encode). There is also some aliasing throughout the encode (I think it is what you are talking about on the white collar), but it is at normal levels, and reducing it would cause other artifacts. If you are very unhappy with the results you are getting, you could post a sample of the HD footage, and ask for advice on converting it to SD with as few artifacts as possible, and see what people can suggest. However, be warned, most proposed scripts will be significantly slower then what you are using now. [edit] Also, a more desciptive thread title will get you more usefull replies.

10th January 2009, 11:26	#9 \| Link
hardkorn Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 73	Thanks for your input *mp4 guy. Why does CCE give such a bad output comparing to HCEnc? And all that flicker right at the beginning? It was encoded with 4 passes and it's worse than hcenc. I've never had so much problems encoding any footage, ever. What do you mean by SD? (me->noob)