[MPlayer-users] Re: best encoder ?
kmu at ratio.de
Tue Jul 23 00:14:04 CEST 2002
Martin Hoffmann wrote:
>>OIC, but since I *do* intend to do playback on TV, what side effects are
>>there, if any ?
> Deinterlacing gives blurry picture on some motion scenes !
> Judge yourself: Record ntv (scrolling text at bottom)
I can't record ntv :( I have only cable not satellite ;) But I got the
> (1) play it as original VDR file
> (2) encode it with lavc WITHOUT -vop pp -npp lb
> (3) encode it with deinterlacing -vop pp -npp lb
> (4) Then try Deinterlacing by dropping one field -vop pp -npp li (if i
> remember right)
> Now judge yourself !
> I guess you'll find (1) and (2) looking best ! (3) is blurry and (4) is less
> resolution !
> Now, why not using (2) with lavc / divx ?? Because the encoder does not treat
> interlaced fields (lines) correctly - he will just encode "dumb" - so he
> wastes a lot of bits on the interlaced lines thinking these are high-details
> - this way we waste too much bits !
Shouldn't I be able to recognize interlaced material on a PC screen on
playback ? I'm not...
> On the other hand, xvid with interlacing turned on decides on a per Macroblock
> basis (if i remember right) if it's interlaced or not ! So he will encode the
> whole picture (as it's not, or less moving on ntv) non-interlaced (as lavc)
> and the bottom part as interlaced ! (Basically encoding every odd and even
> lines seperately ...)
... which costs lots of bits...
> Regarding Wasted bitrate you should try (2) on any fast moving scenes that are
> full screen interlaced (e.g. TV Shows with camera movement!)
> Try it !
I'm doing that (2) all the time since I never used deinterlacing and I'm
quite satisfied with the result. Nevertheless, if it could be better,
I'll surely give it a try :)
>>Hopefully this will be a configurable option ? Since I crop my
>>"cinemascoped" movies an aspect ratio would be no good idea ;)
> Don't get me wrong, AVI alway has sqare pixels per definition - I'm not going
> to break this for 16:9 material (for 4:3 i do, but that's another story) - I
> had just some mistake when scaling 16:9 material !
> Now it does scale to the correct Y values: 720x405 or 480x270 and so on !
> Old versions did scale to 480x432 which in fact is NOT 16:9 assuming sqare
> pixels !
> Does this break anything you use ?
> If so, tell me how it should be ? Leave it 480x576 (original resolution) - or
> what ?
I just encoded an old James Bond movie with cropping (*all* black
surroundings have been cropped, horizontally and vertically) resulting
in a totally unusual aspect ratio of 2:1 (672 x 336 pixel). MPlayer
automagically centers this on playback which gives me back the
"original" but without the TV station's logo (WDR in this case).
> Is the size gain really that much by cropping the bars ? I always thought this
> would not be much gain ...
Even a few saved Megs could decide over fitting on a 650, 700 or an
(expensive) 800 MB CD-R :). Cropping *definitely* speeds up encoding
(I had up to 70 fps (!) with lavc on that particlar movie ) since
without cropping the black borders still *have to* be processed even if
they are resulting in only a few bits I guess...
> RTFM!!! http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu/DOCS
> Search: http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu/cgi-bin/htsearch
with best regards
Softwaredevelopment / Keyaccount Manager
RATIO Entwicklungen GmbH
Email: mailto:kmu at ratio.de
More information about the MPlayer-users