HR wrote:
As the codecs get better and better, how true is the bpp recommandation table in encoding-tips.txt now and in the near future?
Those are just intended to be rules of thumb. I've encoded some stuff at less than 0.2 BPP which looked great and some stuff at greater than 0.25 BPP that still had very noticeable artifacts. The minimum acceptable BPP varies hugely with quality and type of source material, quality of decoder and screen, and especially with the observer. Yes, indeed. So more often than not, I end up doing several encodings to squeeze the best out of the bits. Does anyone have any experience with the XViD mod_quant? It seems like a good idea, but is it really? And I'm assuming that there's no reason not to use the default me_quality value of 6?
quant of 2. I should propably scale it up a bit then, but how can it be that ALL the quants = 2?
That does seem odd. Was the resulting BPP really 0.199? In the end, all that matters is perception. Try a larger frame size and see if it still looks OK. Video encoders are still pretty stupid. Only a Well, my script can ofcourse be buggy, but I'm using bpp (or actually, bpb, since that's a tad nicer when doing non-float math) as an input value to find the best resolution, also considering the AR. So if the resulting bpp isn't what I asked for, it's the decoder to blame given my script does its math right. I can supply the resolution and bitrate and such for someone to verify the sanity of my script... Trying a slightly increased resolution now for a bpp of 0.171, but there's already smoke coming out of my Athlon encoder "slave", so it'll be a few hours... ;) If the quants still are all 2 then I don't know... (no, I'm actually *not* using fixed_quant=2 or anything like that...)
HR