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 > MPEG-4 AVC / H.264

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 6th June 2008, 02:49   #81  |  Link
mahsah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 273
How do you think this would work on anime? Could it be used with gradfun2db to hide DCT blocks?
mahsah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 02:50   #82  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by mahsah View Post
How do you think this would work on anime? Could it be used with gradfun2db to hide DCT blocks?
Yes, in my experience so far it is incredibly good at keeping the dither that gradbun2db introduces as long as you give it enough bitrate (while without, regular x264 will generally butcher banding even at absurdly high bitrates).
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 03:13   #83  |  Link
desta
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 220
I've tried it on quite a bit of animated material now, and have got to say I'm very impressed.

Would I be right in assuming that although psy rdo is activated by default at >subme 6, it's optimised to process an image based on how grainy/noisy it is, including fine texture/detail, etc (in other words good on clean, grainy, or mixed footage)... whereas fgo by nature assumes a source is grainy/noisy, and could therefore be detrimental to a source that has both clean and grainy scenes?
desta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 03:18   #84  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by desta View Post
I've tried it on quite a bit of animated material now, and have got to say I'm very impressed.

Would I be right in assuming that although psy rdo is activated by default at >subme 6, it's optimised to process an image based on how grainy/noisy it is, including fine texture/detail, etc (in other words good on clean, grainy, or mixed footage)... whereas fgo by nature assumes a source is grainy/noisy, and could therefore be detrimental to a source that has both clean and grainy scenes?
Both psy RDO and FGO attempt to make the output have the same <metric> as the input. But you are sort of correct, the metric used by psy RDO will generally be more friendly towards all types of complexity, not merely grain.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 03:23   #85  |  Link
desta
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 220
Brilliant, thanks. I know you said the object of psy rdo was to eventually replace fgo. Is that likely soon? Would you consider it to be more efficient than fgo already, or do you think they both still have their place?
desta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 03:25   #86  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by desta View Post
Brilliant, thanks. I know you said the object of psy rdo was to eventually replace fgo. Is that likely soon? Would you consider it to be more efficient than fgo already, or do you think they both still have their place?
I think its more efficient, but I haven't done enough testing.

One thing I may see is if I can combine the two; Psy RD uses a 4x4 and 8x8 transform for comparison, while FGO uses a 2x2. Maybe I could combine all three transforms?
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 04:10   #87  |  Link
gav1577
Registered User
 
gav1577's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Wales UK
Posts: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
I think its more efficient, but I haven't done enough testing.

One thing I may see is if I can combine the two; Psy RD uses a 4x4 and 8x8 transform for comparison, while FGO uses a 2x2. Maybe I could combine all three transforms?
Wow that would be neat would love to test that one out
gav1577 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 04:13   #88  |  Link
Yoshiyuki Blade
Novice x264 User
 
Yoshiyuki Blade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: California
Posts: 169
With these visual improvements (VAQ and Psy RDO), I wonder if CQMs still have a large impact on image quality. I always have Sharktooth's AVC CQM on, even with animated material, but I haven't tried without it yet. Encoding a full length animated episode is incredibly slow on my lappy. You think CQMs will still remain significant at this stage (given a reasonably high bitrate/resolution)?
Yoshiyuki Blade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2008, 04:20   #89  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshiyuki Blade View Post
With these visual improvements (VAQ and Psy RDO), I wonder if CQMs still have a large impact on image quality. I always have Sharktooth's AVC CQM on, even with animated material, but I haven't tried without it yet. Encoding a full length animated episode is incredibly slow on my lappy. You think CQMs will still remain significant at this stage (given a reasonably high bitrate/resolution)?
I've never really personally liked CQMs, for many reasons.

If you want to make comparisons, short samples should probably be sufficient.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2008, 01:18   #90  |  Link
shae
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
I've never really personally liked CQMs, for many reasons.
Like what?
shae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2008, 01:27   #91  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by shae View Post
Like what?
1) When you're actually trying to keep fine detail, they butcher it.
2) They skew x264's lambda values.
3) They confuse RDO.
4) They confuse trellis even more than they confuse RDO.
5) Prestige, especially, does some really bizarre things.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2008, 01:48   #92  |  Link
ToS_Maverick
x264 Tester
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Austria, near Vienna
Posts: 223
sry for hijacking this thread, but why is x264 so not-suited for CQMs? do other encoders work better with them?
ToS_Maverick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2008, 01:53   #93  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToS_Maverick View Post
sry for hijacking this thread, but why is x264 so not-suited for CQMs? do other encoders work better with them?
It isn't that x264 isn't suited for use with CQMs; nothing of the sort.

First, on the topic of RDO, you can intentionally make CQMs so that RD-wise, the inter matrix will always be favorable (for example), and so inter blocks are nearly always used when in RD mode.

However, the creator of the CQM might not have intended this; for example, the CQM might have been intended for an encoder that didn't use RDO, and therefore would not have taken into account the CQM when making its decision. I strongly suspect Prestige is this sort of CQM.

With trellis, trellis simply does not take into account CQM weights when working. I've found doing so actually reduces visual quality, unless I made a mistake in my patch--go figure.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2008, 01:01   #94  |  Link
techouse
Strictly Rhythm
 
techouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia
Posts: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razorholt View Post
Is it REALLY worth it? Maybe Wizboy or Bobor can try and compile an x264 version with the fixed me-prepass patch for us to test?

Thanks,
- Dan
Just Check out my site http://x264.tk

x264_x86_r871_techouse

Quote:
Source: x264 r871 GIT (git://git.videolan.org/x264.git)

Applied patches (current versions):

x264_hrd_pulldown.04_interlace.diff

x264_me-prepass_DeathTheSheep_techouse_fix.diff

x264_progress.diff

x264_psy_rdo_0.22.diff


Please check http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=130364 and http://git.videolan.org/gitweb.cgi?p...git;a=shortlog for more info

Compiled by techouse on June 6th 2008, 03:13:38 CEST with GCC-4.3.0 on Windows Vista Ultimate SP-1 32-bit.

Commandline used: ./configure&&make fprofiled

Platform: X86
System: MINGW
avis input: yes
mp4 output: yes
pthread: yes
gtk: no
debug: no
gprof: no
PIC: no
shared: no
visualize: no
techouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th June 2008, 06:55   #95  |  Link
desta
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by techouse View Post
Just Check out my site http://x264.tk

x264_x86_r871_techouse
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...86#post1146886
desta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2008, 21:18   #96  |  Link
shae
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shikari View Post
1) When you're actually trying to keep fine detail, they butcher it.
Well, doesn't that depend on the QM and is exactly what CQM are for, to allow you to fine tune what's kept and what's not?

Quote:
2) They skew x264's lambda values.
3) They confuse RDO.
4) They confuse trellis even more than they confuse RDO.
Wouldn't that be implementation specific? It may conflict with other features currently, but in an ideal AVC encoder it should just add flexibility.

Quote:
5) Prestige, especially, does some really bizarre things.
Just extreme values leading to extreme results, no?
shae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2008, 21:22   #97  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 13,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by shae View Post
Wouldn't that be implementation specific? It may conflict with other features currently, but in an ideal AVC encoder it should just add flexibility.
I'd say an ideal AVC encoder wouldn't need any special CQM to workaround it's visual problems

Also I think features like VAQ, FGO and Psy RDO do exactly what people tried to achieve with CQM's before, only in a more sophisticated and more general way.
IMO it's always better to resolve the cause of the problem itself instead of fighting the symptom of the problem...
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.



Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 12th June 2008 at 22:04.
LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th June 2008, 01:59   #98  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,527
An ideal AVC encoder would vary the quant matrix per frame to completely maximize RD. That's one of those exponentially hard problems though, unless someone comes up with a good way to quickly test whether a CQM benefit outweighs its size every frame.
__________________
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th June 2008, 02:32   #99  |  Link
Blue_MiSfit
Derek Prestegard IRL
 
Blue_MiSfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,731
I had an idea for something similar back in the Xvid days, but it would have been very time consuming, and required a lot of user interaction. Here's how I saw it:

1) Take a movie, and split it into comp-test style chunks
2) Encode this multiple times with different CQMs
3) Show the compressionist the individual chunks, with the ability to flip between versions easily, stackhorizontal, interleave, whatever.
4) Allow the compressionist to pick a "top 3" or something for each chunk
5) Tally the votes, and pick a CQM for the movie.

I wish I could code, or I would have cobbled this together just out of curiosity.

But back on topic - I'm a huge fan of PsyRDO. It's improved almost every single thing I've thrown at it.

~MiSfit
Blue_MiSfit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th June 2008, 03:05   #100  |  Link
Razorholt
Cyberspace Citizen
 
Razorholt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_MiSfit View Post
I'm a huge fan of PsyRDO. It's improved almost every single thing I've thrown at it.
Are you using Trellis 2 ?
Razorholt is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
psy-rd, psyrdo

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 21:42.


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