VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2
FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 53 of 53
Thread
  1. Mmmm... I m not used to using scripts. Really, is my approach so awkward? With all the tons of free software out there isnīt there really nothing to do these type of things directly with ONE single program for each specific task? A program to burn subtitles, a program to upscale, etc...
    Quote Quote  
  2. It's up to you whether or not you want to "jump through hoops" or take shortcuts. But if you want to learn, you have to take some initiative and read the guides. No one is going to spoon feed you. If you have specific questions, sure people will help you out.

    You said earlier that the youtube result was ok and subs were legible, so why not stick with that?

    Youtube is one of the very few cases in the video world where upscaling actually makes a visible difference (due to the reasons mentioned earlier with how youtube handles low def videos, not because of "upscaling" algorithm reasons). I can post some examples later if you want

    But if you do a poor upscale, it can actually make things look worse. Image becomes riddled with aliasing (jaggy blocky edges ), and is actually harder to compress for youtube. I can post some examples later too if you want
    Quote Quote  
  3. What I mean is: why doing things in a complicated way if you can do it simpler. Simpler and quicker, is better. For example, I am trying to upscale with this program Video Enhancer. Ever heard of it? But I am not sure about how to set the settings..

    I prefer not to use the 320x240 on Youtube because I donīt like the black lateral bands...
    Quote Quote  
  4. Originally Posted by Valerc View Post
    What I mean is: why doing things in a complicated way if you can do it simpler. Simpler and quicker, is better. For example, I am trying to upscale with this program Video Enhancer. Ever heard of it? But I am not sure about how to set the settings..
    It's really not that complicated once you know the basics. If you're new to it , yes it can be confusing

    Why do things this way? Because the quality is better, the results are better.

    Video Enhancer is not bad, I mentioned it to you in an earlier post. It's probably easier for you to use.
    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/347013-SIMPLE-and-REAL-way-to-add-subtitles-to-an-M...=1#post2169239

    I prefer not to use the 320x240 on Youtube because I donīt like the black lateral bands...
    But your source is 4:3, any time you view a 4:3 video on a 16:9 display you will get pillarboxing . It's unavoidable if you use youtube . Unless you distort the image (stretch it) or zoom in (lose pixels)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillarbox
    Quote Quote  
  5. Thanks for your patience with a stubborn newbie like me...

    Itīs not that I am lazy to learn, just that I am very busy with work really and I shouldnīt even be trying to do this. I am not intending to be a professional video creator. Itīs just that I need some video samples and I wanted them to be rather good.

    About the pillarboxing, do you mean that if I manage to get a video using the whole frame and not letting any lateral bands, it will be deformed?
    Quote Quote  
  6. Originally Posted by Valerc View Post

    About the pillarboxing, do you mean that if I manage to get a video using the whole frame and not letting any lateral bands, it will be deformed?

    The video window in youtube is always 16:9 , whether you view it on youtube, or embed on a webpage elsewhere like a blog.

    Think of it as a rectangular window. You can't change the window - it's always rectangle. But you are viewing a "square" (it's not really a square it's 4:3) within that window - it doesn't fit perfectly

    View the pictures in this post: they show you how you can distort the image to fill the rectangular 16:9 window . Most people don't want to distort or lose active pixels
    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/346422-Cannot-change-a-video-s-display-aspect-ratio...=1#post2164391


    If you use your own host (not youtube), then you can change that window to a custom size and dimension. You can make it exactly 320x240 if you wanted to. Or 640x480 etc...
    Quote Quote  
  7. What about this idea?

    If I just use my 320x240 videos and put up with Youtube showing the black lateral lines, BUT I set MY blog to show them like 320x240, without lateral bands? Any idea if you can customize Wordpress to do that with videos?
    Quote Quote  
  8. Originally Posted by Valerc View Post
    What about this idea?

    If I just use my 320x240 videos and put up with Youtube showing the black lateral lines, BUT I set MY blog to show them like 320x240, without lateral bands? Any idea if you can customize Wordpress to do that with videos?

    Not possible with youtube. Even if you have a paid account with them. (or at least I don't know of any way to do it with youtube)

    They reencode all videos to 16:9 dimensions. You can change the size of the player, but they will always be a multiple of 16:9 eg. 854x480, 1280x720 etc... So you will always get pillarbox when viewing a 4:3 source
    Quote Quote  
  9. You mean that even if I see the videos directly from my blog and not going to Youtube I will still see the black lateral lines?

    In that case, I will try the video enhancer.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Originally Posted by Valerc View Post
    You mean that even if I see the videos directly from my blog and not going to Youtube I will still see the black lateral lines?

    In that case, I will try the video enhancer.

    It has nothing to do with video enhancer.

    Youtube (the service provider), re-encodes all videos with 16:9 aspect ratio. Thus all 4:3 videos will be pillarboxed. Youtube embedded players (even the custom ones) are always 16:9

    If you use your own host $, then you can make the player whatever aspect ratio and dimensions you want . Upscaling isn't as important either, because you can host the video you want (provided its' a streaming format) . The whole point about upscaling was to "trick" youtube into using higher bitrates and better compression . If you use your own host, you don't incur that 2nd re-encoding
    Quote Quote  
  11. OK, I wanted to do the upscaling because I prefer the videos to be bigger and because I donīt have a paid host.

    The whole point about upscaling was to "trick" youtube into using higher bitrates and better compression . Thatīs why it would be interesting to do it...

    Bad news about Video Enhancer. Even if I try the "simple" setting it has, the program doesnīt seem to do anything at all. It looks stuck. I was seeing some posts at VideoHelp saying that it may take like 4 hrs to go through 160 seconds of video with this program!!!

    Can you please tell me if thatīs the case? I am using the simple and the quick configuration (time quicker, and worse quality). And even like that it seems not to be working.
    Last edited by Valerc; 21st Jun 2012 at 19:22.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Speed will depend on your hardware specs. The post you were referring to was probably old. It shouldn't take 4 hours for 160 seconds on a modern computer. Maybe a few minutes at most , especially since your source is only 320x240

    I don't know why it's not working for you
    Quote Quote  
  13. It does absolutely nothing. I have tried it like 6 times already, changing the configuration each time, and ALL it does is creating a small 80 k avi file each time. Always the same tiny size, and it looks like stuck and there are not signs itīs actually doing anything.

    I canīt believe my bad luck!!!
    Quote Quote  
  14. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Youtube (the service provider), re-encodes all videos with 16:9 aspect ratio. Thus all 4:3 videos will be pillarboxed. Youtube embedded players (even the custom ones) are always 16:9
    They're all pillarboxed, yes, but that's been added by the player. They don't reencode 1.33:1 videos as 1.78:1 by adding the pillarbars. Nor do they even honor DARs, as far as I know, because any 720x480 VOB or MPEG uploaded keeps the same 1.5:1 ratio. Just to make sure nothing had changed very recently, I downloaded one of mine that had been uploaded as a 640x480 XviD AVI and ran it through MediaInfo:

    Code:
    General
    Complete name                    : E:\Test\flaA6CC.flv
    Format                           : Flash Video
    File size                        : 13.1 MiB
    Duration                         : 2mn 41s
    Overall bit rate                 : 682 Kbps
    starttime                        : 0.000
    totalduration                    : 161.745
    totaldatarate                    : 680.969
    bytelength                       : 13780836.000
    canseekontime                    : Yes
    sourcedata                       : B4A7DD7E3MM1340322831148433
    httphostheader                   : o-o.preferred.lax04t07.v3.cache8.c.youtube.com
    
    Video
    Format                           : AVC
    Format/Info                      : Advanced Video Codec
    Format profile                   : Main@L3.0
    Format settings, CABAC           : Yes
    Format settings, ReFrames        : 3 frames
    Muxing mode                      : Container profile=Unknown@3.0
    Duration                         : 2mn 41s
    Bit rate                         : 545 Kbps
    Width                            : 640 pixels
    Height                           : 480 pixels
    Display aspect ratio             : 4/3
    Frame rate mode                  : Variable
    Frame rate                       : 23.976 fps
    Resolution                       : 24 bits
    Colorimetry                      : 4:2:0
    Scan type                        : Progressive
    Bits/(Pixel*Frame)               : 0.074
    
    Audio
    Format                           : AAC
    Format/Info                      : Advanced Audio Codec
    Format version                   : Version 4
    Format profile                   : LC
    Format settings, SBR             : No
    Duration                         : 2mn 41s
    Bit rate                         : 129 Kbps
    Channel(s)                       : 2 channels
    Channel positions                : L R
    Sampling rate                    : 44.1 KHz
    Resolution                       : 16 bits
    
    Valerc may be able to get the player on his site to play them without the pillar bars. If he can ever figure out how to upscale it. And then figure out how to configure his site's player.
    Last edited by manono; 21st Jun 2012 at 20:16.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Ahh my bad - thanks for the correction manono

    But the embedded youtube player is always 16:9 AFAIK, I've never seen a custom 4:3 player for youtube

    Actually I'm wrong again! Apparently you can use a 4:3 player . So that should solve your pillarbox issue
    http://support.google.com/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=178264

    It is meant for users, partners and advertisers.
    Not sure what "users" means , is that the free account ?
    Quote Quote  
  16. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Actually I'm wrong again! Apparently you can use a 4:3 player. So that should solve your pillarbox issue
    http://support.google.com/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=178264
    Hehe, I saw your response before you added in the edit, and was on the hunt for some 4:3 players I know I've seen before. But by the time I hit the button to quote you in my response, you had already corrected yourself.

    It's hard to keep up with what YouTube allows sometimes, and the changes it makes, because things change all the time.

    Yes, 'users' are us regular people.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Thanks manono... Iīm "her", not "his", by the way...

    Unfortunately the Video Enhancer is not working for me.... (( So, no upscaling up to now.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Originally Posted by manono View Post
    Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Actually I'm wrong again! Apparently you can use a 4:3 player. So that should solve your pillarbox issue
    http://support.google.com/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=178264
    Hehe, I saw your response before you added in the edit, and was on the hunt for some 4:3 players I know I've seen before. But by the time I hit the button to quote you in my response, you had already corrected yourself.

    It's hard to keep up with what YouTube allows sometimes, and the changes it makes, because things change all the time.

    Yes, 'users' are us regular people.

    Nah it was probably always available, and I didn't know about it. Or the sites I see all use 16:9 content

    So if my math is correct , a 640x480 video would use 640x505 embed size (for the 25 pixels)

    I did do some tests right now, and the difference is there, but it's not as large as it used to be. (There used to be a HUGE difference) . The 320x240 video actually uses h.264 now (the wikipedia page is incorrect - the old VP6 videos were basically unwatchable) , but only baseline profile (no cabac, no b-frames, 1 reference frame) . The 640x480 gets main profile (cabac + b-frames, 3 reference frames) . The audio isn't as bad as it used to be either, it's still 44.1Khz for both (they used to reduce it to 22.05Khz) - but 129Kb/s vs 96kb/s .



    This is from the default youtube viewer (640x360 + 25 pixels I think)

    320x240 video "as is"
    http://youtu.be/ffJjeJ8_vKc

    Click image for larger version

Name:	a.png
Views:	678
Size:	218.1 KB
ID:	12837



    320x240 video upscaled to 640x480 with nnedi3 and lsfmod
    http://youtu.be/uxRkqgJ6xJg
    Click image for larger version

Name:	b.png
Views:	674
Size:	255.7 KB
ID:	12838



    Mediainfo of the downloaded videos from Youtube


    ID : 1
    Format : AVC
    Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
    Format profile : Baseline@L1.3
    Format settings, CABAC : No
    Format settings, ReFrames : 1 frame
    Codec ID : avc1
    Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding
    Duration : 16s 515ms
    Bit rate : 274 Kbps
    Maximum bit rate : 381 Kbps
    Width : 320 pixels
    Height : 240 pixels
    Display aspect ratio : 4:3
    Frame rate mode : Constant
    Frame rate : 29.970 fps
    Color space : YUV
    Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
    Bit depth : 8 bits
    Scan type : Progressive
    Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.119
    Stream size : 552 KiB (73%)
    Tagged date : UTC 2012-06-20 01:17:54

    Audio
    ID : 2
    Format : AAC
    Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
    Format profile : LC
    Codec ID : 40
    Duration : 16s 508ms
    Bit rate mode : Variable
    Bit rate : 96.0 Kbps
    Maximum bit rate : 111 Kbps
    Channel(s) : 2 channels
    Channel positions : Front: L R
    Sampling rate : 44.1 KHz
    Compression mode : Lossy
    Stream size : 193 KiB (26%)


    Video
    Format : AVC
    Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
    Format profile : Main@L3.0
    Format settings, CABAC : Yes
    Format settings, ReFrames : 3 frames
    Codec ID : 7
    Duration : 16s 516ms
    Bit rate : 766 Kbps
    Width : 640 pixels
    Height : 480 pixels
    Display aspect ratio : 4:3
    Frame rate mode : Constant
    Frame rate : 29.970 fps
    Color space : YUV
    Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
    Bit depth : 8 bits
    Scan type : Progressive
    Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.083
    Stream size : 1.51 MiB (85%)

    Audio
    Format : AAC
    Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
    Format profile : LC
    Codec ID : 10
    Duration : 16s 695ms
    Bit rate : 129 Kbps
    Channel(s) : 2 channels
    Channel positions : Front: L R
    Sampling rate : 44.1 KHz
    Compression mode : Lossy
    Stream size : 262 KiB (14%)
    Last edited by poisondeathray; 21st Jun 2012 at 20:37.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Originally Posted by Valerc View Post

    Unfortunately the Video Enhancer is not working for me.... (( So, no upscaling up to now.

    Is there any error message? It just "stops?"

    Do you have a directshow mpeg2 decoder installed ? Something like ffdshow with mpeg2 enabled ?
    Quote Quote  
  20. Originally Posted by Valerc View Post
    Thanks manono... Iīm "her", not "his", by the way...

    Unfortunately the Video Enhancer is not working for me.... (( So, no upscaling up to now.
    I apologize for getting your gender wrong. You can try to upscale in AutoGK to see if the result looks OK to you. As I mentioned before, go into the advanced Settings and set a fixed width of 640.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Originally Posted by manono View Post
    Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Actually I'm wrong again! Apparently you can use a 4:3 player. So that should solve your pillarbox issue
    http://support.google.com/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=178264
    Hehe, I saw your response before you added in the edit, and was on the hunt for some 4:3 players I know I've seen before. But by the time I hit the button to quote you in my response, you had already corrected yourself.

    It's hard to keep up with what YouTube allows sometimes, and the changes it makes, because things change all the time.

    Yes, 'users' are us regular people.

    Nah it was probably always available, and I didn't know about it. Or the sites I see all use 16:9 content

    So if my math is correct , a 640x480 video would use 640x505 embed size (for the 25 pixels)

    I did do some tests right now, and the difference is there, but it's not as large as it used to be. (There used to be a HUGE difference) . The 320x240 video actually uses h.264 now (the wikipedia page is incorrect - the old VP6 videos were basically unwatchable) , but only baseline profile (no cabac, no b-frames, 1 reference frame) . The 640x480 gets main profile (cabac + b-frames, 3 reference frames) . The audio isn't as bad as it used to be either, it's still 44.1Khz for both (they used to reduce it to 22.05Khz) - but 129Kb/s vs 96kb/s .



    This is from the default youtube viewer (640x360 + 25 pixels I think)

    320x240 video "as is"
    http://youtu.be/ffJjeJ8_vKc

    Image
    [Attachment 12837 - Click to enlarge]




    320x240 video upscaled to 640x480 with nnedi3 and lsfmod
    http://youtu.be/uxRkqgJ6xJg
    Image
    [Attachment 12838 - Click to enlarge]




    Mediainfo of the downloaded videos from Youtube


    ID : 1
    Format : AVC
    Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
    Format profile : Baseline@L1.3
    Format settings, CABAC : No
    Format settings, ReFrames : 1 frame
    Codec ID : avc1
    Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding
    Duration : 16s 515ms
    Bit rate : 274 Kbps
    Maximum bit rate : 381 Kbps
    Width : 320 pixels
    Height : 240 pixels
    Display aspect ratio : 4:3
    Frame rate mode : Constant
    Frame rate : 29.970 fps
    Color space : YUV
    Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
    Bit depth : 8 bits
    Scan type : Progressive
    Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.119
    Stream size : 552 KiB (73%)
    Tagged date : UTC 2012-06-20 01:17:54

    Audio
    ID : 2
    Format : AAC
    Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
    Format profile : LC
    Codec ID : 40
    Duration : 16s 508ms
    Bit rate mode : Variable
    Bit rate : 96.0 Kbps
    Maximum bit rate : 111 Kbps
    Channel(s) : 2 channels
    Channel positions : Front: L R
    Sampling rate : 44.1 KHz
    Compression mode : Lossy
    Stream size : 193 KiB (26%)

    Video
    Format : AVC
    Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
    Format profile : Main@L3.0
    Format settings, CABAC : Yes
    Format settings, ReFrames : 3 frames
    Codec ID : 7
    Duration : 16s 516ms
    Bit rate : 766 Kbps
    Width : 640 pixels
    Height : 480 pixels
    Display aspect ratio : 4:3
    Frame rate mode : Constant
    Frame rate : 29.970 fps
    Color space : YUV
    Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
    Bit depth : 8 bits
    Scan type : Progressive
    Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.083
    Stream size : 1.51 MiB (85%)

    Audio
    Format : AAC
    Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
    Format profile : LC
    Codec ID : 10
    Duration : 16s 695ms
    Bit rate : 129 Kbps
    Channel(s) : 2 channels
    Channel positions : Front: L R
    Sampling rate : 44.1 KHz
    Compression mode : Lossy
    Stream size : 262 KiB (14%)

    Itīs great to see this test,poisondeathray. Thanks so much! I only notice a difference in focus, like the upscaled picture is more clear. But the lateral bands are the same. Sooo, if my original is clear it seems that I would get nothing with the upscaling in terms of size.

    However, what still is a problem is that the video looks laterally comprised, images are taller and thiner than the original.
    Do you think that if I do the process of adding the .srt subtitles to the video once more with the AutoGK, but I place a larger width than the original (for example 360 instead of 320), could that compensate the "thinness" of the images I am getting?

    I think that is similar to the idea manono proposed when using AutoGK with a fixed width of 640.
    Last edited by Valerc; 22nd Jun 2012 at 09:48.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Originally Posted by manono View Post
    Originally Posted by Valerc View Post
    Thanks manono... Iīm "her", not "his", by the way...

    Unfortunately the Video Enhancer is not working for me.... (( So, no upscaling up to now.
    I apologize for getting your gender wrong. You can try to upscale in AutoGK to see if the result looks OK to you. As I mentioned before, go into the advanced Settings and set a fixed width of 640.
    LOL! NO need to apologize. You couldnīt know...

    I will try what you propose with AutoGK.

    Thanks!
    Quote Quote  
  23. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Originally Posted by Valerc View Post

    Unfortunately the Video Enhancer is not working for me.... (( So, no upscaling up to now.

    Is there any error message? It just "stops?"

    Do you have a directshow mpeg2 decoder installed ? Something like ffdshow with mpeg2 enabled ?

    Thereīs no message and it just seems to be dead. And I always get the same file, no matter how much I wait: an 80KB tiny AVI file. I was reading the troubleshooting and it suggested something about codecs, yes. I am not sure about my codecs.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!