VideoHelp Forum




+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2
FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 41 of 41
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by UnD3R0aTh View Post
    x264vfw [warning]: not supported option: --preset
    x264vfw [info]: using cpu capabilities: MMX2 SSE2Fast SSSE3 Cache64
    x264vfw [info]: cabac=1 ref=3 deblock=1:-2:-2 analyse=0x3:0x113 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 constrained_intra=0 bframes=5 b_pyramid=2 b_adapt=1 b_bias=0 direct=1 wpredb=1 wpredp=2 keyint=250 keyint_min=25 scenecut=40 intra_refresh=0 rc_lookahead=40 rc=crf mbtree=1 crf=16.0000 qcomp=0.60 qpmin=10 qpmax=51 qpstep=4 ip_ratio=1.40 aq=1:1.00 pulldown=0
    x264vfw [info]: profile High, level 3.0
    i got this!


    Edit:

    why is the new version producing bigger file size at the same settings (CRF 18)?!!! does the command line above contain any parameters that makes it more efficient with file size?
    Well, it looks like CRF 16 rather than 18.
    Quote Quote  
  2. no, i first ticked the command line option off, then i set the CRF bar to 18 in the built-in settings of x264vfw!

    it produces bigger file size with the same quality as the version that comes with FU!


    Edit:

    wow, i encoded the exact same video with the exact same settings twice, and it produced two files with two different file sizes! one of them hangs a bit at first when you play it! the codec looks buggy to me! i'm gonna try bugmaster's build instead!

    edit: it gives even bigger file size than both of them at same settings!

    i don't think the build that comes with FU is crappy or outdated! just look at how long this command line is! it's brilliant! :P

    "--quiet --vd-hack --crf 18 --threads 2 --ref 10 --mixed-refs --no-fast-pskip --bframes 16 --b-pyramid --b-rdo --bime --weightb --filter -2,-1 --subme 6 --trellis 2 --analyse all --8x8dct --vbv-maxrate 25000 --me umh
    "


    p.s.

    that command gives an error on bugmaster's build as well! you sure all parameters are correct?

    "--preset slow --crf 18 --filter -2,-2 --bframes 5 "
    Last edited by UnD3R0aTh; 3rd Mar 2010 at 11:02.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Originally Posted by UnD3R0aTh View Post
    it produces bigger file size with the same quality as the version that comes with FU!
    It's not really comparable, because the versions and settings are different.

    The old build of x264vfw in Fairuse says "Jan 2008" and "svn736", so it's definitely highly outdated.

    that command gives an error on bugmaster's build as well! you sure all parameters are correct?

    "--preset slow --crf 18 --filter -2,-2 --bframes 5 "
    It looks like that latest build of x264vfw doesn't support --preset. Use a full commandline instead, I guess:
    --crf 17 --subme 9 --me umh --trellis 2 --direct auto --b-adapt 2 --bframes 6 --ref 8 --deblock -2:-2 --merange 24 --rc-lookahead 60 --no-fast-pskip --analyse all
    This will be very slow but give a high level of compression efficiency.

    For something somewhat faster and only a bit less efficient:
    --crf 17 --subme 8 --me umh --trellis 2 --direct auto --b-adapt 2 --bframes 5 --ref 6 --deblock -2:-2 --rc-lookahead 50
    (For 1080p material, reduce --ref to 5 and include --merange 24.)
    Quote Quote  
  4. thank you, i'm gonna try that and tell you how it goes!

    btw, how did you know what version comes with FU? i wasted a lot of time trying to figure that out!

    Edit: arlight, it works great even smaller file size than the one that comes with FU! (with CRF 18)

    it looks like these options play a big role in the process, but since the only parameter i'm able to customize is crf, can you tweak these options for me a bit more? i want the maximum quality possible considering that slowness is not an issue (i leave it encoding at night)

    i also would like to learn about these options, do you recommend a guide?

    thx a lot creamyhorror
    Last edited by UnD3R0aTh; 3rd Mar 2010 at 13:18.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Originally Posted by UnD3R0aTh View Post
    btw, how did you know what version comes with FU? i wasted a lot of time trying to figure that out!
    It's right under the x264 logo in your screenshot.
    Quote Quote  
  6. lol, i feel stupid!

    thx



    anyway, there's another problem! that command line gives me oos video on a different DVD! the frame freezes for 2 seconds or so at the begging of the video but the audio plays from start!

    (i tried to turn off VBR mp3, still oos, i turned off comand line and used codec settings, it's in sync)

    Edit:

    sorry, this command line produces oos video on any DVD, the first DVD had voice over instructions so it's hard to tell if it's out of sync!
    Last edited by UnD3R0aTh; 3rd Mar 2010 at 22:10.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Originally Posted by UnD3R0aTh View Post
    (i tried to turn off VBR mp3, still oos, i turned off comand line and used codec settings, it's in sync)
    Sounds like it may be a b-frames issue due to the problematic framework x264vfw has to work within. Try adding --vd-hack, though I have no idea if it'll work. If it doesn't, try b-frames 4 and ref frames 4. Worse come to worse, just use the defaults without the commandline.

    Or just use a tool based on mainstream x264 (not x264vfw), like Handbrake.
    Quote Quote  
  8. works like a charm with the vd hack

    now again, one final request, i really need to tweak those parameters even more to achieve maximum quality and maximum compression possible (again, slowness is absolutely not an issue) btw, shouldi use AVI container or MKV container?

    also, i'd appreciate if you explained this to me, why does everyone, or most of them, hate x264vfw?
    Quote Quote  
  9. Originally Posted by UnD3R0aTh View Post
    now again, one final request, i really need to tweak those parameters even more to achieve maximum quality and maximum compression possible (again, slowness is absolutely not an issue)
    My advice never to push to the absolute limit of quality, because you'll get to the point where you double your encoding time to gain less than 1% in quality (and you can't see the difference anyway). The settings I gave are only a step or two below the absolute max settings. Those are labeled "placebo", meaning you waste a whole lot more time without seeing any visible benefit.

    That said, you can refer to this old thread on Doom9 about the x264 presets & tunings system, and make tweaks appropriate for your source video based on the samples there. The main guide to x264 settings is here at MeWiki.

    btw, shouldi use AVI container or MKV container?
    MKV, because it's intended to hold H.264 and is a modern, flexible container.

    also, i'd appreciate if you explained this to me, why does everyone, or most of them, hate x264vfw?
    Because it has to work within the VfW (Video for Windows) framework, which I think poses a few technical problems (e.g. the need for workarounds like --vd-hack, which doesn't work in all cases although it appears to in FairUse). x264vfw has been largely dead for the last 2 years; this version that you just downloaded only happened to appear in the last week, so you're lucky in a sense.

    Most of the x264 encoding tools out there rely on x264 CLI (the mainstream version) or libx264 (a library), which have remained up-to-date all this time.
    Last edited by creamyhorror; 4th Mar 2010 at 03:10.
    Quote Quote  
  10. alright then, i guess my two questions were well-answered thx to all the ppl who took their time to reply to this thread, i really appreciate it, and i did benefit from all your comments, and on top of them of course is creamyhorror, thx a ton mate

    finger crossed no more problems will come up :P
    Quote Quote  
  11. No problem, and good luck.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

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