VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 28 of 28
Thread
  1. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    I'm just starting to use the presets beyond default in ripbot264. I plan to use the "animation" preset for my anime encodings for the space saving it provides.

    I see the "film" preset option and I plan to use this on a live action (ie real world) movie bluray rip. My question is:

    Is this only for live action film material that is 24fps/23.976?

    Or can this be used for cartoon movies and cgi movies that are also 24/23.976? (or is the "animation" preset better suited for any "non live" material?

    In addition can this "film" preset work well with say a tv series that wasn't shot on film - of any type? I mean like something from the pre widescreen world of pre-2000? Something like say a sitcom?
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Ok I do have a question - is there a reason to use the "film" preset option if you use the 2 pass mode and lock the file size?

    I converted a 2hr10 min bluray (live action) into a 7.95gb 1080p file in 4hrs and 50 minutes using the faster preset on profile 4.

    I love the results (I also used 5.1 ac3 at 640kpbs).

    So would not using the film preset create a less perfect file? And will it speed up the time if I were to untick it?

    I don't really want to waste that much computer up-time on reencoding the same file if others can provide insight into this predicament.

    For the time being I will continue to use the faster preset along with the film preset and the file size lock unless somebody can let me know if its not needed for a 2 pass encoding job.

    Also I am still curious about the other questions regarding cgi and animated movies. I would like to know if the film or animation preset would be better suited for those.

    Also should the film preset be used for older tv shows? Or is the default setting better for those non-film sources?

    Thanks.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  3. Film has a grain in picture, so use film tune preset, animation has not, so use animation tune,

    frame frequency per second has no influence here, imagine movie shot on RED camera, 24p, that is digital, do you see any grain there?, there is maybe digital noise there, but no movie grain, I'd put question like this: Does tune film means film grain or digital noise is kept while encoding, is it the same thing, film grain or noise, for that preset? I think so. But movies shot digitaly might not have that much noise anyway ...and that noise is not desired so no tune film in that case, perhaps like that? This is just thought, because I do not encode movies and optical discs, it might work perhaps like that.
    Quote Quote  
  4. I'm not exactly sure about all the characteristics the tunings set, but film mode increases film grain retention and reduces deblocking in order to prevent posterization artifacts -- especially in dark areas. Animation mode is optimized for large areas with no detail. If you use that on grainy source you will get a lot of posterization. See these two videos, both at crf=18, preset=slow, one with --tune=film, the other at --tune=animation. The film version looks much more like the original.

    The differences are less pronounced at the faster presets. And differences are less clear cut with bitrate based encoding.
    Image Attached Files
    Last edited by jagabo; 27th Sep 2013 at 20:04.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    @ _al_ - thanks. I'm not sure that helps though...

    @jagabo -
    Originally Posted by jagabo
    And differences are less clear cut with bitrate based encoding.
    So if I stick with 2 pass encoding at 8101mb than the extra setting is less beneficial?

    I do plan on using cq on my anime videos. In that case I will definitely use the animation preset. I did notice a space savings while keeping quality acceptable - to my eyes at least.

    Thanks for the clips - good movie too - though I thought it was better than most critics and so called fans do. Though I do admit Insurrection was a bit weak as a standalone movie but it definitely felt more like a tng episode than first contact did. First Contact was much more of a regular action movie than it was a star trek movie. Enough of that though.

    Now that you talk about posterization on large unmoving areas I may have to rethink using it on my anime collection. A lot of it is more "regular" animation in the sense that its not very static.

    I'll have to give it some more thought on future projects whether to leave it at faster-default instead of my initial desire to use faster-animation on animes.

    Thanks everyone.

    More input is always welcome.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  6. Originally Posted by yoda313 View Post
    @ _al_ - thanks. I'm not sure that helps though...
    to answer you title question is no, frame rate has nothing to do with setting tune film or default or animation and after seeing jagabo's samples I think it works like this:

    -your video - your choice, if quality is important in the first place - choose tune film for any movie and don't look back ,animation movies with no noise you choose animation

    -that "close to original look" you keep setting tune film as oppose to default will demand more bitrate, and you are in the business of compressing, so it is your choice, it has its price, more bitrate, setting tune film you will NOT make things worse with any source

    -choose tune default and some noise might be gone, and you might see some "dancing spots" in gradients or dark areas in movie, but you will compress better, you might counterattack with aq-strength increased but that will increase bitrate again
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Thanks _al_ that does help more
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  8. Originally Posted by _Al_ View Post
    -that "close to original look" you keep setting tune film as oppose to default will demand more bitrate, and you are in the business of compressing, so it is your choice, it has its price, more bitrate, setting tune film you will NOT make things worse with any source
    But that bitrate has to come from somewhere. To retain that grain you will get overall lower image quality.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Just choosing --tune film creates bigger file than choosing same CRF with just tune default, but sure using some 2pass to encode to certain size would not move size but quality, question is how those things actually look, for some it will just look the same and file could be 1/10th smaller, it is always about compromise at the end.
    I look at that this way: If tune film was better with the same bitrate needed, it would not be tune but default then, I think and it would be always used for encoding as a better encoder overall with better compressibility.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Personally, I have tune film set as default in my Ripbot INI file. I use the slow preset and CRF 20. I've been considering going to CRF 18 and have done some test encodes for comparison. But CRF 20, tune film, slow preset, looks pretty good on a calibrated (from settings posted on the AVS forum) 70" Sharp, viewing distance 8 feet.

    Not to start the argument all over again, but if you're encoding to BD-9 size, you're (almost) always gonna be using too much bitrate or too little. For example, using the above settings:

    2001 Space Odyssey: 5.25 GB
    Aliens: 16.3 GB

    Surprisingly, you can get a pretty small file size when re-encoding very clean animation using film tune. Same settings:

    WALL-E: 2.81 GB

    I confess I hardly bother any more with calculating bitrates. Hard drives are cheap.
    Pull! Bang! Darn!
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by fritzi93

    I confess I hardly bother any more with calculating bitrates. Hard drives are cheap.
    I do understand that and I do have 2 2tb drives at my disposal for this. However I would like to standardize my process so I can be assured I can put a lot on my units.

    Originally Posted by fritzi93
    but if you're encoding to BD-9 size, you're (almost) always gonna be using too much bitrate or too little. For example, using the above settings:
    You do have a point. However even though i can be fussy I just want to have one setting and go for it. I don't really want to overanalyze my setup for each movie even if it really should be.

    I do appreciate the advice everyone.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  12. Originally Posted by yoda313 View Post
    I just want to have one setting and go for it.
    That "one setting" could just as well be a particular CRF value. CRF=20 as in Fritzi's example would probably average out to less than 9 GB per movie. Every movie will have about the same reasonable quality at that setting. And CRF encoding is faster than 2-pass VBR.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    Originally Posted by yoda313 View Post
    I just want to have one setting and go for it.
    That "one setting" could just as well be a particular CRF value. CRF=20 as in Fritzi's example would probably average out to less than 9 GB per movie. Every movie will have about the same reasonable quality at that setting. And CRF encoding is faster than 2-pass VBR.
    I will try that on my next encoding job. If I like it I'll stick with that.

    Though I'm currently doing another encode at 2pass at 8101mb, ie 7.95gb.

    Thanks.

    (edit and I don't really need to back up the mkvs to dl dvdrs which is the obvious reason for using 8101mb/7.95gb. Since I obviously have the originals and my computer is finally fast enough to do a reencode in a reasonable amount of time redoing it won't be a major hassle. It would suck if a drive fails but as this is for convenience and I don't have a problem with sticking a disc in versus a media jukebox I can live with the time it would take to reencode the lot - plus I don't want to waste a drive on backing up the converted files since these aren't youtube videos where I don't have a physical copy to fall back on - those I do burn to disc and make triplicates of to save redownloading and any conversions that need to be done - sort of triplicates, a lot of those I keep on the computer and burn to disc and copy to a drive but I don't always keep them on the active computer so its kind of a 2.5 time backup)
    Last edited by yoda313; 28th Sep 2013 at 20:35.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Ok I'm happy to report a cq 20 looks very good to me. I also got a 2.5 hour movie encoded to 1080p in just over 4 hours using the faster-default preset.

    Only downside is its a 13gb file.

    But the time it took is great considering the last nearly 2.5 hour movie using the 2pass took 5.5 hours to encode. I think I'll take the more space needed in the cq for making a good looking video since I'll get it encoded faster.

    Thanks everybody.

    Now that I have a good setup going I think I'll be able to breeze through my encoding projects knowing what i want to do with them.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  15. If you are still using the fast preset, try using the veryfast preset instead. It will get you a smaller file size but only very slightly less quality. And it will encode about twice as fast. For example, I encoded a 19 GB, 103 minute movie, at crf=18, tune=film (a 2.35:1 movie letterboxed in a 1920x180 frame). At fast the file size was 6.75 GB, at veryfast 5.39 GB. The fast setting took over two hours (I wasn't keeping real close track) and veryfast took about an hour.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    If you are still using the fast preset, try using the veryfast preset instead. It will get you a smaller file size but only very slightly less quality. And it will encode about twice as fast. For example, I encoded a 19 GB, 103 minute movie, at crf=18, tune=film (a 2.35:1 movie letterboxed in a 1920x180 frame). At fast the file size was 6.75 GB, at veryfast 5.39 GB. The fast setting took over two hours (I wasn't keeping real close track) and veryfast took about an hour.

    Sounds good.

    I'm just about to start another encoding job. I'll do verfast and default but I will still use cq 20.

    Since it will be faster and smaller without much compromise that should be the final setup I'll go with.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  17. I recommend you try fast and veryfast with the same movie and compare the two.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    I wish I read your post about two seconds ago! I just erased my bluray rip and the temp files from my last encode!

    Oh well.

    I am ripping a new disc right now.

    I'll setup two jobs on that.

    I'll do one at cq20 for fast-default and cq20 for veryfast-default and see how it goes.

    Fyi my last two jobs that I did with the cq20 mode finished in just over 4 hours (edit - 4 hours each). Both were right at about 150 minutes long so I do like that encoding time on the faster preset.

    Thanks.

    Edit - looks like I'll have to pick this up tomorrow night. My ripping is going to take awhile and than it takes ripbot awhile to demux to get to the config screen so I don't think I have time to setup the jobs tonight.

    It might be Tuesday before I get results since I'll start the jobs tomorrow night and then test and compare Tuesday for reporting back.
    Last edited by yoda313; 29th Sep 2013 at 19:36.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  19. If you don't use --tune=film veryfast will have a lot more posterization in dark grainy areas.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    If you don't use --tune=film veryfast will have a lot more posterization in dark grainy areas.
    Thanks.

    The ripping is done and the demuxing to get started in ripbot went faster than I thought.

    I am setting one job to faster-default and a second with veryfast-film preset. Both at cq20 and 5.1 ac3 640kpbs.

    ---------------------

    At least for the anime encoding I did I did not any difference between faster and veryfast or veryfast and the animation sub-preset.

    However that is a different beast than a full on live action movie. But the anime was of decent quality and some cg elements in the opening sequence. Those were not noticeably degraded at all in any of the versions I tested. I did test it both on the tablet which was my main destination and on a 40"hdtv. Both seemed a-ok.

    But these regular bluray live action movies will be watched on a tv not a tablet.

    Now I don't think I'm a snob as much on bitrate as some of our regular members here but I don't want to totally scrimp or miss an opportunity to preserve quality.

    As such will defintely scrutinize these encodings to see how they perform.

    Then I will make a decision on that - the encoding time will also be a factor.

    I'll try to report back tomorrow night after I get off work.

    Thanks again.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  21. You could try two encodes of the same movie, one at crf_20, and one at crf_18. I'm thinking you'd be hard-pressed to tell them apart on a 40" TV. Maybe Jagabo can suggest a good test example that would best reveal any quality difference.

    Yeah it looks like my MKVs average a bit under 9 GB. (Bit of a job to calculate, because I have one hour episodes mixed in with the movies, and would have to separate them out first). Anyway, it's damn near impossible to predict what movies will require a lot of bitrate, and others much less. Almost, because as you would expect, a *really* grainy movie like Saving Private Ryan takes bucketloads of bitrate (19.1 GB final file size), and as mentioned, a very clean movie requires far less. That apart, it's astonishing how variable and unpredictable final file size can be.
    Last edited by fritzi93; 29th Sep 2013 at 21:42.
    Pull! Bang! Darn!
    Quote Quote  
  22. The other place you'll see differences between fast and veryfast are the edges of moving objects. Veryfast will have rougher edges because of the lower me and subme settings.
    Quote Quote  
  23. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    can someone explain to me why people take legit blu-rays and then re-encode them to a smaller file size to watch on a tv? unless you're pirating the blu-ray by renting it and trying to make a "backup" copy there's no reason for this and even if you were pirating you're better off buying a BD burner and some BD discs and make a real copy.

    i just don't get it, any re-encoding done, other than lossless, with any encoder, i don't care how good popular opinion holds it to be, will invariably result in an inferior copy.

    also, this thread is a classic example of what i've been saying all along about a certain over-engineered encoder. for the record, here's what the "tune film" setting actually does:

    Set Deblocking to -1,-1
    Set Psychovisual Trellis to 0.15

    and here's what "animation" does:

    Set Deblocking to 1,1
    Set Psychovisual Rate Distorsion to 0.4
    Set Adaptive Quantization to 0.6
    If B-Frames are enabled (non-zero), add 2 B-Frames to Maximum B-Frames
    If using more than one Reference Frame(s), double the number of Reference Frames*

    this is meant for hand drawn animation, 3d cgi is more like film.

    personally if i do use this encoder for something i disable psy-rd and AQ, i use trellis=2 with psy-trellis 1.0, i use esa with me range of 32, deblocking of -2,-2, either sub me 10 or 11 and the rest i decide as i go along.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by fritzi93
    You could try two encodes of the same movie, one at crf_20, and one at crf_18. I'm thinking you'd be hard-pressed to tell them apart on a 40" TV. Maybe Jagabo can suggest a good test example that would best reveal any quality difference.
    Well space is a bit of a factor hear. Even though I have 4tb at my disposal here for this project I do want to maximize my space.

    But I could still test it out.

    Originally Posted by jagabo
    If you don't use --tune=film veryfast will have a lot more posterization in dark grainy areas.
    Well I'm happy to report the version I did with veryfast and film setting did not seem to have any noticeable effects that you describe.

    The movie is a warner bros movie partnered with dc comics. Those logos are really dark on this particular film and I did not notice any peculiar artifacts in it.

    The movie I did at cq20 ac3 640kpbs was 2 hour 20min and was a live action movie (well with some special effects naturally but predominantly a real world movie).

    Other stats:

    faster - default - 3h 13m 56 4.73gb
    verfast - film - 2h 26m 51s 4.22gb

    The time before the file size is the encoding time reported in ripbot. I'm astounded by it. Elated is more like it.

    At this point I'm sorely tempted to just go with veryfast-film at cq20 and call it a day.

    Though at this point I've only tested it on my 32" hdtv not my 40". So I can't call it just yet. I haven't copied them to my usb drive yet. That will be another test.

    Originally Posted by jagabo
    lower me and subme settings.
    Ok you got me there.

    Me and subme settings?????

    First I've heard of those......

    @deadrats - I'm doing this to be lazy so I can have a collection of movies at my fingertips at a reasonable quality and still retain high def and surround sound.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  25. Originally Posted by yoda313 View Post
    Originally Posted by jagabo
    lower me and subme settings.
    Ok you got me there.

    Me and subme settings?????
    http://mewiki.project357.com/wiki/X264_Settings#me
    http://mewiki.project357.com/wiki/X264_Settings#subme
    Quote Quote  
  26. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    Originally Posted by yoda313 View Post
    Originally Posted by jagabo
    lower me and subme settings.
    Ok you got me there.

    Me and subme settings?????
    http://mewiki.project357.com/wiki/X264_Settings#me
    http://mewiki.project357.com/wiki/X264_Settings#subme
    Holy crap!

    I think my brains gonna explode

    Way more than I ever wanted to know.

    I don't think i'll mess with those.

    Thanks for the link though.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  27. They control how the encoder searches for motion. The higher settings can find more, and more accurate, motions. Thereby increasing compression and quality.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    They control how the encoder searches for motion. The higher settings can find more, and more accurate, motions. Thereby increasing compression and quality.
    Thanks.

    I just tested my faster and very fast encoding of the same movie on the 40".

    I really can't tell a difference on the dark logo intros. I would think that means I can safely use veryfast-film for my projects.

    I will go ahead and do a comparison of cq18 and cq20 and see how that goes as well - of course now at the veryfast=film preset.

    Thanks everybody
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

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