MeGUI Tuning Setting

[WAusJackBauer]

Very quick question. What tuning setting is best to use for CGI films such as Shrek, Big Hero 6?

From what I can find out, you should not use animation because that is for drawn animation such as Dragon Ball Z.

So it's a toss up between film or no tuning selected. Please only respond if you know for sure which one is best to use.

EDIT: Should the animation tuning be used for films like Aladdin and The Lion King because they use a combination of drawn animation and still backgrounds.

[hello_hello]

How certain do I have to be before it's okay to respond? Is there any wiggle room? I assume there's not much, given the plethora of replies so far, but I'll be brave and give it a shot.

The tunings are x264 settings, not MeGUI specific. They just modify some of x264's advanced settings in a pre-defined way. If you change the tuning in MeGUI's encoder configuration, MeGUI automatically adjusts the individual advanced settings accordingly. Effectively, the x264 default settings change when you change the x264 tuning. The same applies when you change the x264 speed preset. MeGUI will adjust the appropriate advanced settings to their new defaults.

For a given CRF value, the film tuning will invariably increase the bitrate for virtually any type of content because it tries to retain more fine detail than no tuning. I use the film tuning for almost everything except animation. The manual version of tune film with the default x264 settings would be this MeGUI command line:

program --deblock -1:-1 --psy-rd 1.0:0.15 --output "output" "input"

The animation tuning is designed for animation with lots of flat backgrounds such as the Simpsons. It's probably not better for CGI type animation with more fine picture detail, but it's more about the content than how the animation was created as such.
The manual version of the animation tuning would look like this, with the rest of x264's settings being the default:

program --deblock 1:1 --psy-rd 0.40:0.00 -aq-strength 0.6 --bframes 5 --ref 6 --output "output" "input"

Someone may be able to explain the effect of the individual settings better than I can, but they're kind of the opposite of tune film, plus the animation tuning increases the number of reference frames and B frames, so there's less emphasis on fine detail than there would be using no tuning or tune film, and it might increase the likelihood of blocking or blurring where there's gradual changes in background gradients.... that sort of thing.... hence it being more for animation with mostly solid blocks of colour.
Hover the cursor over the above settings in MeGUI's x264 encoder configuration (advanced settings enabled) and have a read of the tooltip info.

Having said all that, at high bitrates (or low CRF values) the visual difference between tunings can be hard to spot.

[WAusJackBauer]

So you personally use film tuning for CGI movies?

[hello_hello]

I don't encode animation too often so I'm far from an expert on the subject.. For Simpsons type animation I'd use the animation tuning, and for CGI animation with more fine detail and gradients I'd either use no tuning or tune film. Most likely tune film.

[WAusJackBauer]

I have 2 encodes of Big Hero 6 with the same settings except 1 of them I used film tuning.

There's a 1GB difference in size but I can't notice any difference in quality in motion. When I pause on the same frame I can see minor differences.

[hello_hello]

That's probably related to what I said earlier.... at decent CRF values there's not always much visual difference between tunings, but they'll invariably change the bitrate.
I guess for the film tuning, compared to no tuning, you could look at it a bit like simply lowering the CRF value. Both methods will retain more detail (not necessarily the same detail), but like lowering the CRF value, if the quality is already high there might be very little visual difference.

I've been re-encoding a lot of old Xvid/AVIs. I use QTGMC is progressive mode to clean them up a bit. Quite often there's a bit of haloing in the source and the re-encoding/filtering process can enhance them a little. I think it's courtesy of Xvid, and maybe I'm not explaining it properly, but the edges of the halos can look a little "dirty". If you've ever hardcoded subtitles with Xvid you've probably noticed the "fluff" around . There's probably a better word for it, but the outside of the halos look a bit similar.
Anyway.... at CRF18 the film tuning does a better job retaining the "dirty" edges of the haloes than without any tuning, although it's a difference you probably couldn't pick reliably without pausing on identical frames, but there is a difference, so as a rule I don't use a tuning when re-encoding old Xvid/ AVIs.

[WAusJackBauer]

Quick question which might seem obvious, but should I use film tuning for videos I record with my smartphone's video camera?

[hello_hello]

I probably would.

[WAusJackBauer]

I want to encode movies like Aladdin, The Lion King, Tarzan and Mulan which all have partial CGI and not TOO much hand drawn animation like The Simpsons or Neon Genesis Evangelion for example.

Anyone else got any input on using animation tuning or not for these types of movies?