View Profile
View Forum Posts
Private Message
I have video recorded with Canon sx240.
Info orginal video:
Code:General Format : MPEG-4 Format profile : QuickTime Codec ID : qt File size : 509 MiB Duration : 2mn 0s Overall bit rate : 35.3 Mbps Encoded date : UTC 2014-02-13 14:45:03 Tagged date : UTC 2014-02-13 14:45:03 CNTH : WŤ)"ŞEdQ|<(a@VČĂ ĆĐb|9Ł˙ă|B*cdb,#)ţ ľ1-eA Ň˙)_h*zľůĆ&HňAUMĂ / #$ŞBpśΉӁ@H*%OB[fĐBe&!Ř2c,ŇKę" ŮľMxh ˛řg(ˇ˝ż$ŘŔś ůvU| ˛N#`*,Ć8 / ăŢŹv_ą / t%9Đ&řkŰľ0K* com.apple.quicktime.make : Canon com.apple.quicktime.model : Canon PowerShot SX240 HS Video ID : 1 Format : AVC Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec Format profile : Baseline@L5.0 Format settings, CABAC : No Format settings, ReFrames : 1 frame Format settings, GOP : M=1, N=12 Codec ID : avc1 Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding Duration : 2mn 0s Bit rate : 33.7 Mbps Width : 1 920 pixels Height : 1 080 pixels Display aspect ratio : 16:9 Frame rate mode : Constant Frame rate : 23.976 fps Color space : YUV Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0 Bit depth : 8 bits Scan type : Progressive Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.679 Stream size : 487 MiB (96%) Language : English Encoded date : UTC 2014-02-13 14:45:03 Tagged date : UTC 2014-02-13 14:45:03 Color primaries : BT.709 Transfer characteristics : BT.709 Matrix coefficients : BT.709
When I convert this video with avidemux in mp4/h264 I get good quality.
Info converted video with avidemux:
Code:General Format : MPEG-4 Format profile : Base Media Codec ID : isom File size : 5.30 MiB Duration : 5s 46ms Overall bit rate : 8 811 Kbps Writing application : Lavf54.63.104 Video ID : 1 Format : AVC Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec Format profile : High@L4.2 Format settings, CABAC : Yes Format settings, ReFrames : 4 frames Codec ID : avc1 Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding Duration : 5s 46ms Bit rate : 9 000 Kbps Width : 1 920 pixels Height : 1 080 pixels Display aspect ratio : 16:9 Frame rate mode : Constant Frame rate : 23.976 fps Color space : YUV Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0 Bit depth : 8 bits Scan type : Progressive Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.181 Stream size : 5.30 MiB (100%) Writing library : x264 core 123 r2189 35cf912 Encoding settings : cabac=1 / ref=3 / deblock=1:0:0 / analyse=0x3:0x133 / me=hex / subme=7 / psy=1 / psy_rd=1.00:0.00 / mixed_ref=1 / me_range=16 / chroma_me=1 / trellis=1 / 8x8dct=1 / cqm=0 / deadzone=21,11 / fast_pskip=1 / chroma_qp_offset=-2 / threads=3 / sliced_threads=0 / nr=0 / decimate=1 / interlaced=0 / bluray_compat=0 / constrained_intra=0 / bframes=3 / b_pyramid=2 / b_adapt=1 / b_bias=0 / direct=1 / weightb=1 / open_gop=0 / weightp=2 / keyint=250 / keyint_min=25 / scenecut=40 / intra_refresh=0 / rc_lookahead=40 / rc=2pass / mbtree=1 / bitrate=9000 / ratetol=1.0 / qcomp=0.60 / qpmin=10 / qpmax=51 / qpstep=4 / cplxblur=20.0 / qblur=0.5 / ip_ratio=1.40 / aq=1:1.00
But when I convert original video with Adobe PP, color clarity is not OK.
Info video converted with Adobe:
Code:General Format : MPEG-4 Format profile : Base Media / Version 2 Codec ID : mp42 File size : 5.47 MiB Duration : 4s 505ms Overall bit rate mode : Variable Overall bit rate : 10.2 Mbps Encoded date : UTC 2014-04-12 21:54:37 Tagged date : UTC 2014-04-12 21:54:37 TIM : 00:00:00:00 TSC : 24000 TSZ : 1001 Video ID : 1 Format : AVC Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec Format profile : High@L4.2 Format settings, CABAC : Yes Format settings, ReFrames : 3 frames Codec ID : avc1 Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding Duration : 4s 505ms Bit rate mode : Variable Bit rate : 9 979 Kbps Maximum bit rate : 32.0 Mbps Width : 1 920 pixels Height : 1 080 pixels Display aspect ratio : 16:9 Frame rate mode : Constant Frame rate : 23.976 fps Standard : NTSC Color space : YUV Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0 Bit depth : 8 bits Scan type : Progressive Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.201 Stream size : 5.36 MiB (98%) Language : English Encoded date : UTC 2014-04-12 21:54:37 Tagged date : UTC 2014-04-12 21:54:37 Color primaries : BT.709 Transfer characteristics : BT.709 Matrix coefficients : BT.709
When I convert any other video with Adobe I get OK result. I even try convert converted video from avidemux with Adobe
and I get OK result. So, why I have problem with original video from Canon? I tried with manual sequence settings,
sequence from original clip, match sequence setting i always get same result.
Try StreamFab Downloader and download from Netflix, Amazon, Youtube! Or Try DVDFab and copy Blu-rays! or rip iTunes movies!
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 30 of 44
Thread
-
-
clarify what you mean by "color clarity"
Wrong levels? Too dark ? Too saturated ?
Maybe post some screenshots, or post those clips since they are ~5Mb -
To bright. Colors are not vivid like original.
Original:
Avidemux:
Adobe PP:
I tried with handbrake too, same thing with colors. Only avidemux and MEGUI do good job with colors.
videos... (I cut original part with avidemux, set video on copy)
http://www.speedyshare.com/xev6q/videos.rar -
Some consumer cameras have a full-range mode (x.v.Colour / xvYCC) instead of the usually limited YUV luminance and chrominance range (a.k.a. "TV range").
There are video tools which don't care about such details and simply assume common defaults during the conversion between YUV and RGB. Even (or from the experience of A/V savvy people: especially) expensive software may fail to support the whole standard. In general, it is suboptimal to really convert YUV to RGB during video processing, like Premiere does, what your mentioned freeware avoids. -
Definitely a levels issue
kiki_vg - what version of premiere are you using?
Test re-wrapping the original MOV to MP4 before importing into PP, does it make a difference? . e.g. avidemux video=>copy , audio=> copy , format=>mp4
Some versions of premiere use quicktime for importing MOV, and the gamma and levels will be different
Premiere (CS5/CS6/CC) no longer converts to RGB with basically everything. It has a YUV timeline, YUV filters. Only sections that you apply RGB filters get converted to RGBOriginally Posted by LigH.de
-
I use Adobe PP cc v7. I'm still beginner with Adobe, so I will explore about RGB and YUV colors. At least I know now where is problem.
Yes, I tried with avidemux "video=>copy , audio=> copy , format=>mp4", and still colors are OK, just like original. (I can't export audio-copy, because mp4 container allow only aac audio
, but that is not problem here.
-
I downloaded the sample and had a play. I'm not sure where the levels are going wrong and/or whether it's Handbrake getting it correct, but....
MediaInfo only identifies the original video as being AVC, YUV. So if MeGUI is encoding the levels "as-is" it probably doesn't know it's getting it wrong. If it is.
Digging through Handbrake's log file I found this:
Stream #0.0: Video: h264 (Constrained Baseline), yuvj420p, 1920x1080, PAR 1:1 DAR 16:9, 24 fps, 24 tbr, 1k tbn (default)
So I'd start assuming along these lines. Please correct me if I get it wrong.....Originally Posted by LigH.de
- The original yuvj420p video uses full range levels. I don't understand the yuvj format but I've got to start assuming somewhere.
- When I open the original video using MPC-HC my video card expands the levels. I checked, and it does expand them. Therefore if they're already full range, when I display the original video it's actually displaying incorrectly.
- I encode with MeGUI. The video is encoded without changing the levels. The encoded version is displayed with the video card expanding the levels. Once again it's wrong.
- I encode with Handbrake. It converts the full range levels to limited levels when encoding. The encode is expanded back to full range on playback but because it's limited levels to begin with, the video displays correctly.
Based on the assumption yuvj is full range, that's the only way I can get my head around it. Handbrake and Adobe are getting it right, everyone else is getting it wrong.
Of course there's always the possibility yuvj should be full range, but in the case of the OP's video it's limited range, so Handbrake and Adobe think they're doing the right thing but in this case it takes two wrongs to make it right.
I'm inclined to think the Handbrake encode looks correct when I compare it to the original on my TV. The original seems to have a bit too much contrast to me. It's hard to tell though.... some of the the whites look "crushed" either way.
kiki_vg,
PCs use full range levels and video normally uses limited levels. Therefore for video to display correctly on a PC monitor it needs to be expanded to full range levels on playback. Hence my referring to the levels being expanded. Normally when you play video using a standalone player (ie Bluray player etc) it expects the video to have limited levels. As does the TV, so the video displays correctly.Last edited by hello_hello; 15th Apr 2014 at 02:40.
-
Last original video from Canon was cut with Avidemux (video-copy), so I tried now with untouched video from Canon.
Download untouched video:
http://speedy.sh/hncuP/Canon-xs240.rar
Same things with colors. Only with GOM player video converted with Adobe, Handbrake and ORIGINAL video, colors was the same.
But all others player, BSplayer, Media Player Classic, VLC, KMPlayer = Adobe and Handbrake => same colors
= ORIGINAL and Avidemux => same colors
I tried this with default settings on players.
So, you are telling me that Adobe and Handbrake did OK job? I didn't tested on TV. How now I will now what is right what is wrong?Originally Posted by hello_hello
On PC it look like Avidemux and MEGUI => ORIGINAL video
Handbrake and Adobe => colors are not vivid like original.
So, now I'm confused how I should convert videos I ony want to have videos converted in good quality.
-
Broadly, on a PC, 0-255 (RGB) is correct. For TV, 16-235 (YUV) is correct. Both are good quality.
-
There is no "right and wrong" .
What you "think" is the "original", really isn't the original. It's the RGB converted representation of the original YUV video
You can adjust the levels to whatever you want because premiere works in YUV (e.g. you can use the levels filter, or fast color corrector - both operate in YUV )
Many Canon cameras (DSLR's and point and shoot models) record with the full range flag (the yuvj hello_hello was talking about) .
Most open source decoders obey the flag (e.g. vlc, ffmpeg, avidemux) - they output 0-255 for Y' levels . Decoders like quicktime clamp the levels to 16-235 . Note that is in YUV (not RGB) .
The problem with full range, is that you will be clipping some details when it gets converted to RGB for display . (When you "see" something on a display, it's in RGB, not YUV) . ie. there might be some visible data on the bright and dark ends that are not visible -
Ok, but If what I "think" is not actually original, what should I use to see original (colors/brightness... of video) and start editing, so I could get image like I want? If you understand me? Do I first insert video in Adobe and start editing based on what I see in Adobe, or when I convert video with Adobe, play on TV or PC? Where I can see real video colors of video I editing?Originally Posted by poisondeathray
-
Originally Posted by kiki_vg
Ok, but If what I "think" is not actually original, what should I use to see original (colors/brightness... of video) and start editing, so I could get image like I want? If you understand me? Do I first insert video in Adobe and start editing based on what I see in Adobe, or when I convert video with Adobe, play on TV or PC? Where I can see real video colors of video I editing?Originally Posted by poisondeathray
This might be confusing to you, but there are no "real colors".
All your issues here are derived from the full range flag and how different decoders handle that flag
If you 're editing in PP, those are the colors you will be seeing in the preview. You can change them to whatever you want using levels filter or whatever . You can use the scopes, waveform , histogram, rgb parade to guide your color corrections
Once you edit and re-encode the export , that flag is gone (Adobe won't encode with a full range flag) , so it should look the same everywhere , in all players (except quicktime player, which imposes gamma shifts as well)
If you're editing in some other program that obeys the full range flag, those are the colors you will be seeing (because it's decoder is decoding full range) , so if you export again without the full range flag it will be the same as what you see in the preview. So you see, it really doesn't matter because you're going to be exporting without the flag -
I'd go so far as to say Handbrake and Adobe could be getting it right. At least in relation to the original. The problem is I have no idea whether yuvj video is normally full range (edit: I just re-read one of poisondeathray's posts and he indicates it is). The fact Handbrake and Adobe appear to convert the levels would seem to indicate that's the case (video would normally have limited levels), but I have no idea whether your particular video is full range, even if yuvj video normally would be.Originally Posted by kiki_vg
So, you are telling me that Adobe and Handbrake did OK job? I didn't tested on TV. How now I will now what is right what is wrong?
On PC it look like Avidemux and MEGUI => ORIGINAL video
Handbrake and Adobe => colors are not vivid like original.
So, now I'm confused how I should convert videos I ony want to have videos converted in good quality.
And to top it off, I have no idea if you're viewing the video using the same range of luminance levels as I am using a PC. For all I know, your PC playback setup mightn't be expanding the levels as mine does, so we might be viewing the videos with different levels. Therefore what looks correct to me might look wrong to you.
(it disappointed me when I discovered I'd been viewing video on a PC monitor using the wrong luminance level range for years)
I downloaded your last sample. I don't know if anyone else has looked at it but to me the original "MVI_2261.mov" file looks like it has too much contrast while after converting with Handbrake it looks better. That's just my opinion though. Here's how the original and encodes can look for me. This is with my video card set to expand the levels, or not. I have the player (MPC-HC) set not to expand the levels.
Original video, levels expanded on playback.
Original video, levels not expanded on playback.
Handbrake encode, levels expanded on playback.
Handbrake encode, levels not expanded on playback.
To me, pictures two and three look correct, which means (if I'm correct about what looks correct) the video uses full range levels (hence the first pic looking too dark to me because the levels shouldn't be further expanded) and Handbrake is getting it right, but that's just my opinion. The Handbrake encode without the levels expanded on playback (pic#4) looks a bit washed out, but that'd be normal if the video uses limited range levels which aren't being expanded correctly on playback when using a PC.
Hopefully the above will at least illustrate what I meant when it comes to expanding the levels because you need to make sure your starting point (the way you're viewing the original video) is correct before you can determine if converting the levels while encoding is correct.... or not.
Normally this sort of thing isn't an issue (ie when converting movies or TV shows etc) as they just get converted "as-is". So even if the original is displaying incorrectly, the encoded version would be too and they'll look the same.
Last edited by hello_hello; 16th Apr 2014 at 00:59.
-
For the record, judging from the screenshots in your original post, I'd assume you're not viewing the video with expanded levels on playback. Therefore to you the original video looks correct, but the Handbrake encode probably looks washed out. If the screenshot is the same levels you're seeing when playing the video, I'm pretty sure that's what's happening.
To me though, with the levels being expanded, the original video looks too dark. I think. Maybe.....
Here's an example. This is the first screenshot from your post #3 (resized). The pic which looks fine to you (and to me).
[Attachment 24528 - Click to enlarge]
Here is it again after taking a screenshot with the levels being expanded on playback. Which is how I'm seeing the original video on playback, not the way you are as indicated by your screenshots. Does that make sense?
[Attachment 24529 - Click to enlarge]
If in doubt, play both the original and encoded versions using a device which expects TV (limited) levels, such as a Bluray player or TV media player etc. That should give you a known starting point and might give you a better indication as to whether the original is correct or whether Handbrake's being clever or silly etc. Assuming your TV is close to calibrated and you don't have an "odd" idea as to what looks "correct".
I used my CRT monitor for all that, which isn't even remotely close to being in the vicinity of "correctly" calibrated, so I'm guessing a little too. I'm sure others will be able to comment as to which pics look "right" to them.
Even when using a TV for viewing it's sometimes hard to be sure, because many HD TVs do automatic contrast/brightness adjustments. Mine does even when I tell it not to, so I can display this web page on my TV and how bright the pics look will depend on whether I maximise the browser or not (maximised, there's more white around the pictures so the TV adjusts the contrast/brightness and they looked more "washed out"). I'm not sure whether larger LCD PC monitors would do a similar thing. I'm still using a CRT monitor.
Ignore this image, it was a test.
Last edited by hello_hello; 16th Apr 2014 at 23:00.
-
I have Intel HD graphic card (G4320)Originally Posted by hello_hello
Is this setting you are talking about? Limited / Full? Because if I set on Limited or Full nothing change, everything is the same.
In MPC-HC, where is options to expand levels?
Yes, this is absolutely true. Screenshot is the same levels I seeing when I playing video. And, yes, video converted with Adobe and Handbrake to me looks washed out.Originally Posted by hello_hello
So, what that meen, my settings are wrong?
How can I tested I set my settings right? -
Yes, the "Input range" is the interesting control group. And you may try to switch to "Application settings" to allow applications to control the range, instead of always overriding it in the driver.
-
It all gets confusing (for me anyway) and possibly no two setups work the same way, but here's how it works for me. MPC-HC, XP.Originally Posted by kiki_vg
I'm pretty sure the only renderer which expands the levels when using MPC-HC is the EVR renderer (custom presenter). As far as I know, none of the other renderers do. The option is only available when using EVR . You can change the renderer under Options/Output. As you can see I'm not using EVR so the levels option is greyed out. Whether it's XP or my video card drivers, I'm not sure, but even when using the EVR renderer the option makes no difference for me. It might only work when running a newer version of Windows (it definitely works when using Win7 as I tested it on a friend's PC). If you were already using the EVR renderer and a newer version of Windows then it should have been expanding the levels as I'm pretty sure it's set that way by default.
[Attachment 24534 - Click to enlarge]
I'd test your setup using a "normal" video (not your camera's recording) as it should use limited levels. Find one which has an image with black bars top and bottom encoded into the video such as a DVD video. Make a note of the colour of the black bars. If they're black and you change the levels and the bars become dark grey then the levels should be okay as they were. If you change the levels and the black bars don't get any blacker but the picture itself gets darker, then the levels were already correct. If the black bars go from dark grey to black when you change the levels, then they were wrong.
At least once you've confirmed "normal" vidceo is displaying correctly (ie the encodes are displaying as they should) you can probably work out from there which version correct.
If you select "Input Range/Driver Settings/Full" that should ensure full range levels regardless of the player being used. Any levels setting a player has should have no effect. Make sure you select "Apply" and it might pay to close and open the player once you do. I can change the levels using the video card drivers and they'll change once I resume playing the video, but not immediately if it's paused.
Hopefully some of that will help, and forgive me if I was wrong and the levels were already right. I'm only speculating based on what seems logical to me regarding a PC which is probably half way around the world.
Last edited by hello_hello; 16th Apr 2014 at 04:46.
-
I am using windows 8.1.Originally Posted by hello_hello
I found original DVD video with black bars.
If I set input range (video card) on Full.
Here are result with Media Player classic...
Full
System Dafault - Black bar => black
Old Video Render - Black bar => black, but quality of video is very bad
Overlay Mixer Renderer - Black bar => black
Video Mixing Renderer 7 (windowed) - Black bar => black
Video Mixing Renderer 9 (windowed) - Black bar => dark grey
Video Mixing Renderer 7 (renderless) - Black bar => black
Video Mixing Renderer 9 (renderless) - Black bar => dark grey
Enhanced Video Renderer - Black bar => dark grey
Enhanced Video Renderer (custom presenter) - Black bar => dark grey
Sync Renderer - Black bar => dark grey
madVR - Black bar => Black
Limited
System Dafault - Black bar => black
Old Video Render - Black bar => black, but quality of video is very bad
Overlay Mixer Renderer - Black bar => black
Video Mixing Renderer 7 (windowed) - Black bar => black
Video Mixing Renderer 9 (windowed) - Black bar => black
Video Mixing Renderer 7 (renderless) - Black bar => black
Video Mixing Renderer 9 (renderless) - Black bar => black
Enhanced Video Renderer - Black bar => black
Enhanced Video Renderer (custom presenter) - Black bar => black
Sync Renderer - Black bar => black
madVR - Black bar => Black
Application Settings
System Dafault - Black bar => black
Old Video Render - Black bar => black, but quality of video is very bad
Overlay Mixer Renderer - Black bar => black
Video Mixing Renderer 7 (windowed) - Black bar => black
Video Mixing Renderer 9 (windowed) - Black bar => dark grey
Video Mixing Renderer 7 (renderless) - Black bar => black
Video Mixing Renderer 9 (renderless) - Black bar => dark grey
Enhanced Video Renderer - Black bar => dark grey
Enhanced Video Renderer (custom presenter) - Black bar => dark grey
Sync Renderer - Black bar => dark grey
madVR - Black bar => Black
If I set on Limited, and in Media Player Classic if I set on madVR , original video from Canon and converted video with Adobe are the same colors. -
Ahhhhhh..... maybe the penny has dropped for me...... I'm not sure. I've never used Intel graphics myself. The setting for your video card may effectively be the opposite of mine. I've always looked at my setting as being one to choose the "output level" but in your case it's marked "input level". So it appears when you select "full" you're telling the video card "the levels are already full range" and it doesn't expand them. When you select "limited" you're telling the drivers they're limited and it needs to expand them... I assume. For me, "full" means "expand the levels" etc. Exactly the opposite. At least I hope so or my world will come tumbling down.....
I can't explain why some renderers behave differently using XP than they do with Win8. I just checked a few of them and when I have "application settings" selected in the Nvidia Control Panel, none of the Windows renderers expand the levels correctly. Not even EVR. I'm sure it did at one stage, however it doesn't now. It could also be a graphics driver difference. I might ask about it in the MPC-HC thread over at doom9. Anyway......
I should have thought to check MadVR myself. I'm fairly sure MadVR is agreeing with Handbrake and getting it correct. Or (at least) MadVR is assuming the Canon recording is full range. The other renderers seem to be "dumb" and assume it's limited range like any other YUV video.Originally Posted by kiki_vg
If I use MadVR and set the video drivers to "application settings" so they leave the levels alone, the original video and the HandBrake version display the same way. MadVR seems clever enough to not expand the levels for the original video, but it expands them for the Handbrake version and the end result is they display the same.
Likewise if I have the video card set to expand the levels, when I use MadVR the original and the Handbrake version still display the same (the other renderers display the original video darker). I'm doing some assuming here, but I think the renderer can tell the video drivers what the levels are, so if the drivers are set to expand the levels, they don't get expanded twice. So for MadVR it sees the original is full range, tells the drivers it's already full range and the levels don't get expanded again. When playing the Handbrake version it expands the levels as it should, tells the video drivers "already full range" and once again the original and the Handbrake encode display the same way. I'd suspect using MadVR, the MeGUI/AviDemux encoded version would display darker than the original video? They do for me, but whether the Intel Graphic drivers work the same way as my drivers appear to...... you seem to be configuring the Input level as opposed to the Output level so I could only guess as to how that effects the way it all works, if it does.
Anyway..... based on all that theorising, I'd currently go with the original video being full range, the levels should be converted to limited range when encoding, and therefore Handbrake and Adobe are getting it correct (as is MadVR) and everyone else is getting it wrong.
Which just leaves me curious as to which configuration you were using before all this started? Were the black bars black or dark grey? It appears whatever your setup, as a general rule the levels weren't being expanded, hence the original video looking fine and the Handbrake/Adobe version looking "washed out". With the levels being expanded I think the original should end up looking a little too dark (except when using MadVR), the MeGUI/AviDemux versions should look the same and the Handbrake/Adobe versions should look right.
So which renderer/video card configuration were you using originally? If the levels weren't being expanded correctly originally then it explains everything, if they were........ I'll try not to think about it yet.
Sometimes though, video card drivers can just be broken and you end up with unexpected results. Or different results when using different players/renderers. There was a well known bug in (mostly) ATI drivers years ago which caused some video to display incorrectly, depending on the renderer and resolution. http://avisynth.nl/index.php/Luminance_levels#Which_combinations_give_wrong_levels.3F
Only a couple of days ago I updated the drivers for my Nvidia card. Unless I'm going nutty, that stopped the levels from being expanded correctly over the DVI output. (I have the TV set to expect full range levels as the PC monitor does). In the end I checked another PC using both the VGA and HDMI inputs on the TV, confirmed the levels from this PC were washed out by comparison, uninstalled the new drivers, re-installed the old ones and everything went back to normal. It's the first time something like that has happened and I'm certain it wasn't all in my head. Computers.....Last edited by hello_hello; 17th Apr 2014 at 02:59.
-
Eh... I didn't pay attention how it was set graphic card at beginningOriginally Posted by hello_hello
I know in Media Player Classic it was at Video Mixing Renderer 9 (renderless)
I did a little test with DVB-T Receiver MPEG4 (infinity hd 8000), but on CRT TV. I can't play original video from Canon because receiver not supported that format. But converted videos from Adobe, Handbrake and Avidemux can play (h264/mp4).
So, image on videos converted with Adobe and Handbrake are not vivid, like they are on Avidemux video, in other words video looks more like is washed out.
To me, video looks better convert with avidemux, more colorful. And I did play video with black bars on CRT TV through receiver too, and black bar are black.
I'm gonna tested on LCD LED TV too, probably in a week because it didn't near me at the moment.
I do not know how you see the video and what look better to you, to me this image:
looks better than this one...
This one to me is washed out.
And I did' one more test with youtube. I uploaded original video and video converted with Adobe. And I guess you were right!
Both videos are the same colors. To me both looks washed out, but there are the same colors
Last edited by kiki_vg; 17th Apr 2014 at 06:03.
-
I'd agree. The top image looks better than the the bottom one. I'm pretty sure the top image is the same as images 2 and 3 in my post #13, and they're the ones I thought looked right. Only thing is, for me image 3 (or your top one) was the Handbrake encoded version with the levels correctly expanded on playback. So now I'm confused, where'd the top image in your last post come from? Is that the original, or Avidemux or Handbrake etc?
I still think it's Handbrake/Adobe getting it right, even if they look more washed out using your CRT TV, but you can only go with what looks best to you. If you're using MeGUI/Avisynth you can adjust the levels however you like. You'll possibly hate me for this, because two choices is bad enough, but when the possibilities are almost endless.......
http://avisynth.nl/index.php/Levels
It's a built-in Avisynth function, so you could change PC levels to TV levels like this (the second number is a gamma adjustment):
Levels(0, 1, 255, 16, 235)
But you could change them anyway you like.
Levels(0, 1, 255, 8, 245)
YLevels is a script, which works slightly differently, but it can be used in the same way:
http://avisynth.nl/index.php/Ylevels
It requires MaskTools2.
ColorYUV does level conversions, amongst other things. It's a built-in Avisynth function.
http://avisynth.nl/index.php/ColorYUV
ColorYUV(Levels="TV->PC")
And then there's Tweak. http://avisynth.nl/index.php/Tweak
I just thought I'd let you know about those functions, in case you didn't already.
-
My image from the last post (the top one) this is your image which I used just to show to you example how I see original video when I first play video from Canon on PC without changing any settings, and that's way I was thinking that handbrake and adobe doing wrong job.Originally Posted by hello_hello
So, at the bottom line because the original video from Canon I was seeing wrong I think that's how should look original video, right?
And that was the problem for me, couldn't understand that
I need in media player classic set on madVR and based on that I should editing video how to me looks best, right?
About CRT TV, video from avidemux looks better for me because it has more color. But if I could play original video from Canon on TV I would see that original video and video from adobe are the same color, and avidemux video is of course more colorful because avidemux is doing wrong job, right? Right!!! Now I finally understend where was the problem I was seeing original video on wrong way the whole time!!!
Thank you all loot for all this!
About video card settings, no matter if I set on Full or Limited, I don't see any difference when I play video. Is that OK or it shouldn't be like that? -
Well...... I think you were seeing the original video correctly in the first place..... without it's levels being expanded, and because it's full range, on a PC that's how it should look. I'm referring to pic 1 in your opening post. Pic 2 (avidemux) looks the same as the original (correct) because it's levels aren't being expanded either, but they weren't converted to TV levels when encoding so they're still full range. Pic 3 (Handbrake) isn't having it's levels expanded, but it was converted to TV levels when encoding, so it looks incorrect. That's what seemed to be happening originally to me. Do you know which renderer you were using when all this started?
To be honest, based on my testing, I'd go with using MadVR because it seems to be the smartest renderer. At least on this PC and that's all I can go by. This is how it's working for me. If I'm using MadVR it doesn't seem to matter how the video card is set, MadVR decides on the levels, but if you set the video card to use the "application setting" for levels, then MadVR should definitely be running the show.
If I display the original video using MadVR it looks like the 1st pic in your post #20. The Handbrake encode looks exactly the same. Therefore I think MadVR is getting it right both times. Expanding the levels for the encode, but not for the original. In fact if I use MadVR to display the Avidemux encode, it looks darker than the original, because MadVR is expanding the levels and they weren't converted correctly when it was encoded.
That's all I can go by..... what I'm seeing and how it seems to me. If you use MadVR and get different results..... although I don't know why you would... but let me know. I'd like to try to work out why.
To answer your questions....
Yes. I'd use MadVR with MPC-HC and go with whichever looks best, and I'm sure that'd mean the original. The Handbrake version should look the same. That's my theory.
Well actually..... don't forget most standalone devices expect video to have limited levels, so unless you device is particularly clever I suspect the original video may display darker than it should. Maybe the playback device is clever enough to see the levels are full range and correct them, but keep in mind it's possible the original may be displaying incorrectly on the TV.About CRT TV, video from avidemux looks better for me because it has more color. But if I could play original video from Canon on TV I would see that original video and video from adobe are the same color, and avidemux video is of course more colorful because avidemux is doing wrong job, right? Right!!!
I hadn't done it yet, so I stuck your samples on a USB thingy and plugged it into my TV (Plasma). The TVs media player won't play the original video so I can't comment there, but it'd play the encodes. To me the Handbrake/Adobe versions look right, while the Avidemux version looks too dark, but that's just my opinion.....
Which video?About video card settings, no matter if I set on Full or Limited, I don't see any difference when I play video. Is that OK or it shouldn't be like that? To be honest I'm no expert on this. It may depend on the renderer, and you're using a different video card with different drivers than I am.
When you tested, you found some renderer/driver setting combinations where you could see black was dark grey, so I'd assume for those combinations the video should look different to the rest. It's all very confusing...... -
Now you're confusing me again
Picture 01 from first post was Original video from Canon, picture 2 = avidemux and picture3=Handbrake
This images and when I was playing this videos, video render was set on Video Mixing Renderer 9 (renderless).
If I set on madRV Original video and Adobe video looks the same, but avidemux looks darker, more colorful, it looks close to original video if I original video watching with Video Mixing Renderer 9 (renderless), but still not the same colors.
If I set on Video Mixing Renderer 9 (renderless), Original video and Avidemux looks the same, and Adobe looks washed out against them.
Here all images to show you what I mean, and how it's look when I playing videos.
All images looks the same no matter if is set on Limited or Full, result is always the same.
http://speedy.sh/psGMX/Images.rar
So, now what? Now we're at square one again, still don't understand where is the problem.
But when I tired play this videos in Gom, with all renders Original video and Adobe is always the same, and always in same colors. I could show you and this images if you want.
This make me thinking, if in Gom player, original and Adobe videos are the same, and on youtube Original and adobe are the same, maybe something wrong with Media Player Classic settings, besauce only with him I have problem?Last edited by kiki_vg; 17th Apr 2014 at 11:18.
-
Of the three different driver settings you tested, two of them in combination with VMR9 renderless showed black as dark grey. Which means the levels aren't being expanded. So it seems likely they weren't being expanded when this all started. Remember, video need to be expanded to full range levels to display correctly if it's limited range (which normally it would be).Originally Posted by kiki_vg
Now you're confusing me again
Picture 01 from first post was Original video from Canon, picture 2 = avidemux and picture3=Handbrake
This images and when I was playing this videos, video render was set on Video Mixing Renderer 9 (renderless).
Pic1. Original video, full range levels = displays correctly.
Pic2. AviDemux encode, full range levels = displays correctly.
Pic3. Handbrake, limited range levels, no expansion on playback = displays incorrectly (looks washed out).
Does that make sense? It also assumes the original video is actually full range, which I think it is.
Well if Adobe looks the same as the original, while avidemux looks darker, it can't look close to the original too.Originally Posted by kiki_vg
That aside, that's exactly what I was saying. MadVR doesn't expand the levels for the original video, it's full range so it looks correct. It expand them for the Handbrake encode which is limited range, it displays the same. It expands them for the AviDemux encode but that wasn't converted to limited levels so now it looks too dark.
That sounds like it's because VMR9 never expands the levels. Original displays okay because it's full range, Avidemux displays okay because it's also full range (but normally it shouldn't be) and Adobe looks washed out because it's limited range, but it should be, and the levels should be expanded on playback to fix it, but they're not.Originally Posted by kiki_vg
Gom and MadVR might be equally clever.Originally Posted by kiki_vg
Have you uploaded the original directly to YouTube? If so, YouTube re-convert everything. They may have converted the levels from full to limited range in the process.Originally Posted by kiki_vg
-
Hopefully someone else will download your encodes (posts 3 & 8), use a standalone player to play them, and offer an opinion as to whether the Handbrake or the Avidemux versions look correct. I still think the Handbrake versions do, but I could be wrong......
It can be hard to tell because if you spend a bit of time looking at video using the wrong levels, your brain tends to adjust, and then when you switch back to the correct levels, the correct version looks wrong. And the "correct" version mightn't be "right" in terms of brightness/contrast anyway. That'd depend on the camera settings and the amount of ambient light etc. When I say "correct" I'm really only referring to whether it's displaying as "intended", and not whether the contrast/brightness could be adjusted to improve it from there.... if that makes sense.
So to a certain extent "right" and "wrong" can be subjective if one of them is closer to the way you prefer it than the other, even if the one your prefer is technically "wrong"....Last edited by hello_hello; 17th Apr 2014 at 12:09.
-
Oh, men I'm going crazy from all this
If you saying this:
Then Handbrake is doing wrong job? Shouldn't be if I have original video, converted video must be the same? I do not understand.
How can I get then video converted with Handbrake or Adobe in full range levels that looks like original, isn't this point?
All I want is to have converted original video to h264/mp4 that look close to original. That could only be if I watching them in mdRV, right?
If I set on Video Mixing Renderer 9, that not true.
Or I'm wrong converted video shouldn't be like original? -
No, my above theorising was based on the assumption the levels weren't originally being expanded on playback, therefore most video (limited range) would have previously displayed looking a little "washed out" (you may have not noticed) as the Handbrake encode did. The original video and the Avidemux version would have looked right because they're full range, but video isn't normally full range..... And of course that theory could be wrong, it's just what seemed to be happening, to me.
It comes down to this:
If the original video has full range levels, then it should be converted to limited range when encoding. Handbrake is doing just that. Avidemux is not. I don't think there's any doubt there, which means the million dollar question becomes...... is the original video full range or is it limited range?
If it's full range, Handbrake is correct, if it's limited range, Handbrake is wrong.
The original video appears to be flagged as full range so therefore it should be full range, and that's no doubt why Handbrake is converting the levels, but there's no guarantee it is full range just because it's flagged a such. It just should be.
All of that is completely separate to how you're seeing the video on playback, because how you're seeing it depends on whether the levels are being expanded or not, and that's not necessarily consistent. MadVR, for example, doesn't expand the levels when displaying the original video because it's flagged as already being full range. It expands the levels of the Handbrake encode because it's supposed to be limited range. "Full range not expanded" = "limited range expanded" and the two look the same, but they're not.
That's why to me the Avidemux version looks darker than the original using MadVR. The levels are full range (or at least the same as the original), MadVR expands them because technically it should, but "full range expanded" means the video ends up darker than it should be.
Is any of that helping......
PS Once you've converted the video and you're playing it using a standalone player which expects all video to have limited levels (no expanding on playback to worry about as when viewing video on a PC) either the Handbrake encode should look correct or the Avidemux version will. And which one is "correct" should directly relate to whether the original video was full or limited range in the first place, and whether converting it to limited range was the right thing to do.
When I play the encodes on my TV I think the Handbrake version looks correct, but as I've said, that's just my opinion. The Avidemux version may look more "correct" to you, but to me it looks like it's got too much contrast.
I guess none of that is helping.......
I wish someone else would download the sample encodes and offer an opinion......Last edited by hello_hello; 17th Apr 2014 at 13:21.
-
Could you explain to me why if video is recorded in Full range need it to be converted in limited range? Why is that, sorry but I'm not expert in this area. I know just what I see and looks better to meOriginally Posted by hello_hello
So how can I found out how is video recorded? Send Canon email or there is some test for this, or is written in instructions of camera?
Or should I connect Canon camera through HDMI to TV and play video and and compare videos from handbrake and avidemux to see who is right? Or there is some Canon converter for this videos?
If I don't found out how originally video is recorded, then I will converted separately videos for youtube, PC and TV. If for youtube video looks fine to me, I will leave like that, same thing with PC and TV, end of story
-
Originally Posted by kiki_vg
Could you explain to me why if video is recorded in Full range need it to be converted in limited range? Why is that, sorry but I'm not expert in this area. I know just what I see and looks better to me
All content should be produced using normal range. Because if your video is decoded as full range there is a strong chance that the decoder software or hardware setup won't handle it properly. Most equipment, software is set to handle normal range video. This is why you're having these inconsistencies in the first place!
Your video camera ALWAYS records in h264 mode with the full range flag. You cannot change that. That's the source of all your inconsistencies. So import it into premiere, make whatever color, levels adjustments and export it - that's it. When it's exported, there will be no flag.
So how can I found out how is video recorded? Send Canon email or there is some test for this, or is written in instructions of camera?
Or should I connect Canon camera through HDMI to TV and play video and and compare videos from handbrake and avidemux to see who is right? Or there is some Canon converter for this videos?
You're not going to like this , but It's full range if the decoder obeys the full range flag. It's limited range if the decoder ignores the full range flag - it's as simple as that. Note that is in YUV. It's like is the glass half empty or half full. It's a matter of perspective (In this case, it's a matter of what decoder does) . The flag doesn't determine "what it is". The flag just signals to the decoder : "hey, I'm full range" . It's just a "label" or a suggestion to the decoder as what to do with the video.
But how the YUV data (limited or full range), then gets converted to RGB for display (what you actually see) involves a few more steps, including the renderer choice .
If video is decoded at full range and converted to RGB with a full range matrix WILL LOOK THE SAME as a limited range video, decoded at limited range, converted to RGB with a standard matrix. Problems occur , when you have full range converted to RGB with standard range matrix (that's what's happening in your "original" and "avidemux" screenshot . I can post some examples to help clarify if this doesn't make sense - basically you're losing details (some data is there, but not being represented as best as possible in RGB screenshot)
VMR9(renderless) is the least accurate - you will always have elevated black levels. If you want the intel or any graphics card settings to affect your video, set it to video overlay mixer. Then the graphics card overlay settings will directly affect the video. You probably have other issues on playback configuration
As you can see, there are multiple points of failure
Often people are more attracted to "contrast", but technically that's not the correct way to do it. Recall I said open source decoders, ffmpeg, libav, avidemux etc... decode at full range. That's fine if the conversion to RGB for display is done with full range matrix . The problem is you're not doing it that way, you're using standard range matrix for viewing - so the image is more contrasty, areas are clipped
Quote