VideoHelp Forum

Try DVDFab and download streaming video, copy, convert or make Blu-rays,DVDs! Download free trial !
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3
FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 71
Thread
  1. Originally Posted by Budman1 View Post
    Just adding my 2 cents to the great help already given but when I want to blur a face, and track it, I use virtual dub plugin Nveiler. It is not free but does a great job, especially if the face is moving. I have virtualdub set up to save in several formats such as mp4 utilizing call to external ffmpeg program.

    Vdub is also capable of editing functions and subtitling thru its many plugin filters.
    It does not have smart encoding and encodes the entire video with what ever specs you set , including bit rate, fps, etc.

    The biggest time is setting up the export settings to save in other than AVI.
    Thanks for your input. So from what I understand,, Vdub is basically just and editor like the one I am trying to use at the moment (Tmpegenc) but, it needs plugins to perform its operations?
    Quote Quote  
  2. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    1. Try " -c:a:1 aac "
    https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/Encode/AAC


    2. Could be the #1 audio stream is in some format that tmpgenc doesn't support and needs converted to another audio format first with ffmpeg.
    So, here is what I did. I found another GUI for ffmpeg because for whatever reason the one you recommended just wasn't doing what I was asking it to. Plus, I was really getting overwhelmed with all those syntaxes for the ffmpeg command line. The GUI I have now called is called Myffmpeg. So, I did what you told me and stream copied the video, but converted the audio stream that I wanted to AAC like you suggested. This appears to have worked because now it works in Tmpegenc.

    I don't understand why it worked if the original audio stream was already in AAC but here are the two stream comparisons mediainfo gave me.

    Original Audio Stream:

    Audio #1
    ID : 2
    Format : AAC LC
    Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec Low Complexity
    Codec ID : A_AAC-2
    Duration : 1 h 41 min
    Bit rate : 835 kb/s
    Channel(s) : 8 channels
    Channel layout : C L R Ls Rs Lb Rb LFE
    Sampling rate : 48.0 kHz
    Frame rate : 46.875 FPS (1024 SPF)
    Compression mode : Lossy
    Delay relative to video : 20 ms
    Stream size : 604 MiB (8%)
    Language : English
    Default : Yes
    Forced : No


    After reencoding:

    Audio
    ID : 2
    Format : AAC LC
    Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec Low Complexity
    Codec ID : mp4a-40-2
    Duration : 1 h 41 min
    Duration_LastFrame : -1 ms
    Bit rate mode : Constant
    Bit rate : 341 kb/s
    Channel(s) : 6 channels
    Channel layout : C L R Ls Rs LFE
    Sampling rate : 48.0 kHz
    Frame rate : 46.875 FPS (1024 SPF)
    Compression mode : Lossy
    Stream size : 247 MiB (4%)
    Language : English
    Default : Yes
    Alternate group : 1
    Encoded date : UTC 2020-02-21 02:17:06
    Tagged date : UTC 2020-02-21 02:17:06
    Menus : 3


    Now, you stated that I would be doing this just to see the problem. So, is there a way to keep the original audio stream or at least not loss quality?
    Quote Quote  
  3. Ah, I see.
    That's a 8 channel (likely 7.1) audio stream.

    https://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/product/tvmw7_spec.html
    Tmpgenc only handles up to 5.1 (6 channels) in AAC audio for encodes.
    It does handle 7.1 (8 channels) for encodes in pcm/flac/etc.

    Based on this, I'm guessing the same with input files.

    1. Create a test file with 1 video, 1 audio stream (the one you want).
    2. Convert the audio stream to lossless pcm, then try opening it in tmpgenc.
    ffmpeg -i Input.mkv -c:v copy -c:a pcm_s16le Output.mkv

    ...

    Otherwise, will need to find a video editor that natively handles video files with 7.1 (8 channel) aac audio.
    Quote Quote  
  4. I created a test case - a file with a aac lc 8 channel (7.1) audio track - and tried to open it with a few common video editing programs.

    Image
    [Attachment 52090 - Click to enlarge]

    Vegas Video clearly can't handle such a file - it only opens 7 tracks instead of 8, and the sound is distorted during playback.

    Image
    [Attachment 52091 - Click to enlarge]

    Premiere CC 2020 can handle such a file - it opens up all 8 tracks, and the sound is fine during playback.

    This ONLY works when the encoded original is in MP4 format, not MKV - neither of the two handles the latter.

    ....

    This suggests that you may need to compromise if you can't convert your file into some sort of compatible file format that TMPGENC handles (I'm thinking PCM/FLAC 7.1/8 channel audio in a MP4 file might do).

    Otherwise, you know Premiere probably will work with your file, but it'll reencode the entire video track on output.

    ....

    The limitation is merely the nature of the video editing profession.
    One rarely gets multi-channel sound in a MP4/MKV file, if ever, from a professional production shoot, and muti-channel audio is almost always recorded as seperate tracks for postproduction panning and placement, thus, no good support by most video editing programs for this. Consumer devices can record 5.1 sound, so that's typcially the maximum supported.
    Image Attached Files
    Quote Quote  
  5. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    Ah, I see.
    That's a 8 channel (likely 7.1) audio stream.

    https://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/product/tvmw7_spec.html
    Tmpgenc only handles up to 5.1 (6 channels) in AAC audio for encodes.
    It does handle 7.1 (8 channels) for encodes in pcm/flac/etc.

    Based on this, I'm guessing the same with input files.

    1. Create a test file with 1 video, 1 audio stream (the one you want).
    2. Convert the audio stream to lossless pcm, then try opening it in tmpgenc.
    ffmpeg -i Input.mkv -c:v copy -c:a pcm_s16le Output.mkv

    ...

    Otherwise, will need to find a video editor that natively handles video files with 7.1 (8 channel) aac audio.
    I truly can't thank you enough for taking the time to help me like you are.

    So, I did what you said and yes, I now can open the video file in Tmpegenc with the audio stream I want. Now, I still want to use Tmpegenc since I think its the one you recommended to meet my needs. I really don't need any audio encoding for anything higher then 5.1. So, what that in mind, my questions are as follows:

    1) If I come across this again where a video has a 6.1 or 7.1 encoded audio stream, can I just reencode to 5.1 AAC with no loss or very minimal loss in quality?

    2) What container should I be looking at to have my videos on, MKV or MP4? I'd like something that works with most devices and is easy to work with in an editor like Tmpegenc.

    3) What audio codec should I be looking to be settling on if I just want to maybe occasionally watch something in 5.1 surround? Most of the time it will just be 2-channel but I would still like to have that option of 5.1.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Ok. So continuing with tmpgenc because it can do smart encoding (not touching parts of the video not edited)...

    1. Yes.
    Command line
    https://www.reddit.com/r/PleX/comments/9htmso/anyone_know_a_way_to_convert_mkvs_with_7...tent=post_body

    Gui
    https://firstadekit.com/2019/05/07/how-to-quickly-convert-truehd-7-1-audio-to-5-1-ac3-...-via-usb-port/

    ...

    The ffmpeg documents suggest
    https://stackoverflow.com/questions/24610892/ffmpeg-downmixing-flac-6-1-to-aac-5-1
    -c:a aac -6
    Can down convert to 5.1 (6 channels).

    Keep in mind, mixing audio is usually done during movie production to 7.1 or 5.1 directly because sometimes, you'll have a voice inn the right position in a 7.1 mix that isn't if the 7.1 mix is merely downconverted to 5.1.
    (Naturally, ffmpeg is powerful enough that you can extract, and remix however you want - but at that point, it's probably too much for this project.)

    ...

    Generally, 1 conversion of audio isn't going to introduce significant noticeable artifacts, so going from 7.1 to 5.1 ought to be fine (without having to go to pcm/flac, which you can do).

    Easiest way without specifying a specific bitrate is to convert the 7.1 to 5.1 aac using variable bitrate set at the highest quality:
    -ac 6 -c:a libfdk_aac -vbr 5

    (Haven't tested if it's -c:a aac or -c:a libfdk_aac that you'll need to use, but I'm sure one of the two encoder tags will work.)

    2. Mp4 is the most universal format.

    3. Aac and mp3 are generally universal
    Since aac is slightly higher quality at the same bitrate, I'd use that.
    Quote Quote  
  7. I didn't find a command line in that post or any of the links but it was recommended a lot to use Toolnix and then Mkvmerge. I think I'd rather stick with FFmpeg.

    All I could find here was that the GUI was for converting to AC3 and I'd like to stick to AAC as you suggested.

    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    Keep in mind, mixing audio is usually done during movie production to 7.1 or 5.1 directly because sometimes, you'll have a voice inn the right position in a 7.1 mix that isn't if the 7.1 mix is merely downconverted to 5.1.
    (Naturally, ffmpeg is powerful enough that you can extract, and remix however you want - but at that point, it's probably too much for this project.)
    Are you saying the I will lose a voice inn if I down convert to 5.1 or merely that it will be in a different position?


    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    Easiest way without specifying a specific bitrate is to convert the 7.1 to 5.1 aac using variable bitrate set at the highest quality:
    -ac 6 -c:a libfdk_aac -vbr 5

    (Haven't tested if it's -c:a aac or -c:a libfdk_aac that you'll need to use, but I'm sure one of the two encoder tags will work.)
    The Syntaxes are kind of overwhelming me since I don't yet have the knowledge necessary to understand why I am using them. I have the MyFFmpeg GUI and it seems to have a lot of the commands that the FFmpeg command line uses. I will post some pics of the options later and maybe you could help me decipher which options are the best to achieve a 5.1 downgrade with no or minimal quality loss.

    Have you used the MyFFmpeg GUI before? Any opinions on it?
    Quote Quote  
  8. 1. Command line
    what I was saying was I mentioned prior command lines like
    ffmpeg -i Input.mkv -c:v copy -c:a pcm_s16le Output.mkv

    ffmpeg is the program you want to run.
    -i means what follows is the name of your input/original file
    input.mkv is the name of the file - change it to match your filename.

    -c:v copy
    this means for the video (v) channel (c), simply copy it.

    -c:a pcm_s16e
    this means for the audio (a) channel (c), convert it to pcm 16 bit

    You'd simply edit the command line
    ffmpeg -i Input.mkv -c:v copy -ac 6 -c:a libfdk_aac -vbr 5 Output.mkv

    where
    -ac 6 means change it to 5.1 (6-channel) audio mode
    libfdk_aac means use the aac encoder
    -vbr 5 means use the highest quality variable bit rate encoding

    2. myFFMPEG
    Oh!!
    That is a REALLY nice and easy to use interface for FFMPEG!
    I'd even use it over FFMPEG for how nice it is if I had a use!

    Image
    [Attachment 52095 - Click to enlarge]

    Super easy to convert the 7.1 audio to 5.1.
    Simply set the type to AAC, then EDIT the audio conversion SETTINGS to set the channels to 5.1.

    I tested my test clip I posted earlier and it works fine - no issues with the audio down-mixing.

    3. Audio downmixing
    Smart programs like ffmpeg will do it correctly and maintain a good mix.

    Think of it like 5 people standing around you all talking at the same level.
    Obviously, you would normally focus on the person in front of you, and the other voices can be ignored (doesn't seem as loud).
    You can clearly understand what the person in front is saying, while ignoring the other people standing around you.

    Now, take those 5 people and put them all directly in front of you, all taking at the same level.
    Now, it's more difficult to understand anyone - like a group of screaming kids - because they are all at the same location.
    Your brain can't filter out one person as well.

    A good audio down-mix from 5 channels to 1 channel like this would turn down the volumes of the other 4, so that you can hear the voice of the 1 person you want to listen to.
    Quote Quote  
  9. You beat me to the punch. I was gonna post that image you posted.

    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    1. Command line
    what I was saying was I mentioned prior command lines like...
    Thank you for explaining. I'm trying to learn FFmpeg but for a noob it can seem daunting. I do have a background in MS-DOS that helps a little.

    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    2. myFFMPEG
    Oh!!
    That is a REALLY nice and easy to use interface for FFMPEG!
    I'd even use it over FFMPEG for how nice it is if I had a use!
    Whew!!! I'm glad you approve because I was really hoping to use it.

    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    3. Audio downmixing.
    I think I understand.

    So, what about the advanced audio settings in Myffmpeg? Click image for larger version

Name:	Advanced Audio Settings..PNG
Views:	13
Size:	42.2 KB
ID:	52096
    Do I need to adjust these or will just having the settings in the "edit" tab set to how you described be sufficient enough to what I want to achieve (no loss or very minimal loss in quality after converting to 5.1)?
    Quote Quote  
  10. Nothing to change in the advanced settings.
    In the audio settings, above channels, you'll see bitrate.

    Increasing that to the maximum would help minimize losses.
    You'll always have some loss reencoding.

    For aac, the minimum is giving each channel about 128kbps (basic acceptable quality. Like common streaming radio or mp3 music files).

    For 5.1 (6-channels), that's about 768kbps total.
    That or 2x-3x that is sufficient.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    For 5.1 (6-channels), that's about 768kbps total.
    That or 2x-3x that is sufficient.
    So how would I achieve 2x-3x that if my highest option is 768kbps? do I manually type it in and that will do it?
    Quote Quote  
  12. I'd try typing it in.
    If that doesn't work, oh well...
    (Meaning there definitely is a way to do it by command line, but if myffmpeg can't do it yet, you'd have to wait for a future version.)

    In any case, try it and compare the audio. Do you hear any difference?

    ...

    Yes, others have done tests
    http://bernholdtech.blogspot.com/2013/03/Nine-different-audio-encoders-100-pass-recomp...-test.html?m=1

    Up to you if it matters.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    I'd try typing it in.
    If that doesn't work, oh well...
    (Meaning there definitely is a way to do it by command line, but if myffmpeg can't do it yet, you'd have to wait for a future version.)

    In any case, try it and compare the audio. Do you hear any difference?

    ...

    Yes, others have done tests
    http://bernholdtech.blogspot.com/2013/03/Nine-different-audio-encoders-100-pass-recomp...-test.html?m=1

    Up to you if it matters.
    So yes, I can type it in manually. I did a test at 768kbps and the difference is almost imperceptible. I will try though at your recommendations to have 2x-3x that and see how it sounds. Thank you so much for your help. I can finally start to learn to edit in Tmpegenc. That will be a journey on its own and I hope when I have questions you will be here to help me. Should I make a new post if i have some more questions or should I just keep commenting in this thread?
    Quote Quote  
  14. Same thread is fine.

    I'd test tmpgenc thoroughly on one file to see if it does all you'll be asking of it before working on everything else. Hopefully, being around a decade+, it will.

    Test the encoded final file.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    Same thread is fine.

    I'd test tmpgenc thoroughly on one file to see if it does all you'll be asking of it before working on everything else. Hopefully, being around a decade+, it will.

    Test the encoded final file.
    So, this is a unrelated question, but I figured you would probably know so I thought I would ask you, My current PC is a laptop and its currently fine for handling 1080p video but it just can't handle 4k video editing.

    Since you already know my current editing needs, I was wondering if you had any suggestions on a budget PC build that could handle 4k editing smoothly. I never buy PCs prebuilt as I have always built my own PCs since the very early 90s. I recently built a PC that is capable of 4k 60fps playback but I know that playback and editing are two different things.

    Its my understand that the CPU needs to have at least 16 threads and that the GPU is not that important unless using and editing program requires GPU usage?

    Thanks in advance.
    Quote Quote  
  16. 1. Current laptop
    1a. What are the specs of the laptop?
    CPU, RAM, GPU (if any)?

    1b. If you have an Intel CPU, it may have Quicksync H.264/H.265 encoding/decoding in hardware to accelerate such.
    https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/quick-sync-video/q...o-general.html

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quick_Sync_Video
    Here, AVC/H.264 is supported since the 2nd generation (sandy bridge). eg. a i7-2673M (note the 2 for 2nd gen) supports hardware accelerated playback and encoding of H.264.

    For H.265/HVEC, you'll have to get a 6th generation or newer CPU.

    In SUPPORTED video editing applications, turning Quicksync support on greatly speeds up encoding and playback of supported media types.

    1c. Note that the selection of your video player, video editor, etc. affects your ability to play 4K on a laptop.
    eg. With a default VLC install on a i7-2673M laptop, it can't play 30fps, drops frames, and has blocking artifacts.
    Image
    [Attachment 52122 - Click to enlarge]


    On the other hand, MPHC plays 4K just fine at over 30fps on the same laptop.
    Image
    [Attachment 52123 - Click to enlarge]


    1d. Most top video editing applications have support for CPU/GPU acceleration of playback/effects/rendering.
    Some enable this automatically upon detection of the CPU/GPU, others need you to turn the feature on. (see documentation)

    Image
    [Attachment 52124 - Click to enlarge]

    Consumer level software like PowerDirector and TMPGENC even have such acceleration.

    1e. See product specs
    Some products are HEAVY applications - meaning even though a video file plays fine in another video editing application, it needs a far more powerful computer.
    One that comes to mind is Avid Media Composer. It is the ONLY Hollywood video editor in use on major blockbusters, does EVERYTHING, but naturally, reflecting the 1000+ page manual, it also needs a very powerful system to run well.

    Other programs like TMPGENC and Vegas Video are LIGHT applications - meaning it has a small install file, doesn't need much to run on, and can run on slower, older systems.

    eg. Premiere needs https://helpx.adobe.com/premiere-pro/kb/gpu-and-gpu-driver-requirements-for-premiere-pro.html
    eg. TMPGENC needs https://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/product/tvmw7.html#system

    Note that this does not mean it will run snappy and well - only that the program will run, possibly with skipping and delays, but will get the job done with patience.

    1f. Proxy
    Some video editing programs like Premiere, Vegas Video, etc, can create video proxies (lower resolution video copies of your originals for quicker playback during editing).
    Image
    [Attachment 52126 - Click to enlarge]
    Image
    [Attachment 52127 - Click to enlarge]


    By doing so, you can even edit 8K on a years old laptop without much trouble. Playback will be smooth, and the only thing you'll wait for is the encode (which is limited by the hardware capabilities - newer tends to be faster at encoding even with the same number of cores, ghz, etc).

    By creating proxies for Vegas Video for example, I can easily scroll through the 4K video, play it, and edit it like a lower resolution video on the i7-2673M laptop.

    1g. SSD drive, not HDD drive!
    https://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?Ntt=inland+ssd+2.5&searchButton=search
    Even a 256GB SSD sells for under $35 nowadays, and will SIGNIFICANTLY speed up playback/rendering on a laptop. (eg. a Windows 10 install can take just 15 minutes rather than 60 minutes on a SSD)

    Before you build a new PC, if your laptop has an Intel CPU with 4K Quicksync support, I would swap a HD for a SSD and test again in a video editor that supports Quicksync.
    You may find that the hardware combo works fine with a SSD.

    ....

    This means, find out what CPU/GPU your laptop has, and turn on hardware acceleration in the video editor. Try a few like Vegas Video to see if the proxies are all you need to edit without having to build yet another computer to get the job done (assuming the rendering time isn't going to bother you - test and see. There is hardware accelerated (eg. Quicksync or Nvidia NVENC) rendering as well that makes this faster as well).

    Here, on a 2nd generation (8 years old CPU) i7-2673M laptop, with proxies, there's no issues editing 4K.

    ....

    2. Building a new PC
    2a. To handle 4K without proxies, and the upcoming 8K (Now that the Samsung S20 Ultra smartphone films in 8K video), you'll need to focus on 2 aspects - playback and rendering/effects.

    2b. For playing 4K video with Quicksync acceleration (smooth playback, low CPU use), you'll need a 7th generation Intel CPU or better.
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/10610/intel-announces-7th-gen-kaby-lake-14nm-plus-six-n...g-in-january/3

    For 8K video, you'll likely be using very heavy (big) video files that are in H.264 (AVC), even H.265 (HVEC), format.
    https://developer.nvidia.com/video-encode-decode-gpu-support-matrix
    Notice the video type and resolutions supported by the graphics card to accelerate playback.
    For 8K, I would suggest adding a NVIDIA 1050ti or better video card. 1660ti, even a 2060 RTX at minimum if money allows.

    These are rules-of-thumb - you can always find ways to get 4K/8K to play on slower/lesser systems, but in general, if it's simply drop the 4K/8K video on your computer and play, you'll want these minimums.

    2c. RENDERING

    There's two ways to speed this up.

    1. A newer CPU (even with the same number of cores and threads)
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/14043/upgrading-from-an-intel-core-i7-2600k-testing-san...idge-in-2019/9
    Keep in mind that the leap won't be HUGE.
    Notice how a 8 years old i7-2600k (4 cores, 8 threads) is only 37% slower than a 5-years newer i7-7700k (4 cores, 8 threads).

    Currently, the game is to increase the number of cores/threads to handle 4K and 8K video editing to the point where AMD just released their $4000 64 core/128 thread CPU.
    (https://www.anandtech.com/show/15483/amd-threadripper-3990x-review)

    BUT, CPU cores/threads alone isn't going to make for the FASTEST PC for 4K/8K video editing due to different optimizations between Intel and AMD.

    Testing only 1 program Premiere Pro on different CPUs gives these results:
    https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-CPU-performance-Intel-Core-X-1...-3rd-Gen-1629/

    Just skip reading and look at this chart: https://www.pugetsystems.com/pic_disp.php?id=58322
    Jump to the bottom, 4K HEAVY CPU EFFECTS (testing the power of the CPU).
    Notice that for 4K PLAYBACK, all CAN NOT achieve 30fps or better playback!!!!
    Look above at 4K HEAVY GPU EFFECTS (testing the power of the Graphics Card).
    NOTICE that for 4K PLAYBACK, all CAN achieve 30fps when a NVIDIA 2080ti Graphics Card is installed.

    This means for 1 program Premiere CC you can get 30+fps playback even on a old PC with a good Nvidia graphics card.
    (If you look at the link above, even a 1050ti can handle H.265 4K playback.)


    For another program like DaVince, which can't run without a graphics card, you get different benchmarks:
    https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/DaVinci-Resolve-Studio-CPU-Performance-Inte...-3rd-Gen-1630/
    https://www.pugetsystems.com/pic_disp.php?id=58330

    Different video editing programs will behave differently, so you'll need to setup, optimize, and test.

    Notice that the Intel CPUs, even with fewer cores, tend to perform better than AMD CPUs with the same number of cores.

    2. Graphics Card
    The other way to speed up video editing, for programs that support such, is to add a graphics card.
    The graphics card does its own processing seperately of the CPU, allowing for faster video editing,effects, rendering.

    Which one?
    https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-CC-2019-AMD-Radeon-VII-vs-NVID...orce-RTX-1395/

    DON'T EVEN BOTHER with AMD graphics cards.
    1050ti on a tight budget - it'll give you 4K playback and acceleration
    1660ti with more money, 2060 through 2080 with even more money.
    (I'll stop there because if you need a NVIDIA TITAN multi-graphics card system, you'll be talking about $10,000+ PC systems...)

    2d. RAM
    Whatever is suggested by the video editing program, or 8GB at the minimum, 16GB preferred.

    2e. Drives
    Naturally, 4K/8K video takes up a lot of drive space, which means fast read/writes is crucial.

    At minimum, a SSD drive, not a regular hard drive.
    As money allows, RAID of SSD drives in stripped mode so that the PC can write in parallel to all the SSD drives.
    eg. 2 SSD drives in raid doubles the read/write speed~, 4 SSD drives quadruples that, etc.

    Given that a single 256GB ssd is <$35, you can have a quadruple SSD RAID for <$150 total.
    (eg. if 1 drive writes at 500MB/second, 4 drives in RAID = 2000MB/second)

    .......

    Knowing the above, you can drop a powerful $100-500 Nvidia graphics card into a i7 CPU system, even a few years old, add a SSD, and get very good 4K editing performance.
    Many people do it this way with video editing and gaming - they buy a $100-300 used Dell PC workstation off craigslist, then refurbish by adding a GPU and SSD to get a very nice system cheap (Some even sell them for a living).

    If you don't add a GPU, then a 9th/10th generation Intel CPU with Quicksync will accelerate playback/encoding significantly, so you can still get a workable system that way with a video editor that uses proxies even if you only get a basic 4-core/8-thread CPU.

    Export/rendering is significantly sped up with Quicksync or Nvidia encoders by the order to 10x+ faster, so definitely worth using vs. CPU only software encoding for the time savings.
    Quote Quote  
  17. And no, DON'T BUY any MAC unless you love to waste lots of $$$$$$.

    eg. The fastest available Macbook Pro laptop configured with the best CPU/GPU CAN'T run faster than a $1000 gaming laptop!
    The GPU they use isn't faster than a Nvidia 1660 even on a $5000 Macbook Pro!

    ...

    Yes, you can edit 4K perfectly fine on a laptop. Gaming laptops often have all you need.

    eg Basic 2K display $599 1650 https://www.microcenter.com/product/606363/msi-gf63-thin-9sc-257-156-gaming-laptop-computer---black

    eg 4k display $1600-2000 https://www.bestbuy.com/site/razer-blade-stealth-13-3-4k-ultra-hd-touch-screen-gaming-...?skuId=6377166
    https://www.bestbuy.com/site/msi-prestige-15-15-6-4k-ultra-hd-laptop-intel-core-i7-16g...?skuId=6382856
    https://www.bestbuy.com/site/msi-15-6-4k-ultra-hd-laptop-intel-core-i7-16gb-memory-nvi...?skuId=6382859
    https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/laptops/thinkpad/thinkpad-p/P53/p/20QNS01800

    The OLED display on the Lenovo P53 is Dolby HDR certified, so perfect for 4K HDR video editing.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    1. Current laptop
    1a. What are the specs of the laptop?
    CPU, RAM, GPU (if any)?
    So, I currently have an intel core i7-3540m and it does support Quicksync. RAM is DDR3 at oh around 1600Mhz? GPU is hwere I am really lacking as I only having Intel HD 4000 and even Tmpegenc recommends at least a GeForce 650 which is like 300% more powerful.

    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    1c. Note that the selection of your video player, video editor, etc. affects your ability to play 4K on a laptop.
    eg. With a default VLC install on a i7-2673M laptop, it can't play 30fps, drops frames, and has blocking artifacts.

    On the other hand, MPHC plays 4K just fine at over 30fps on the same laptop.
    I do have MPHC installed on my HTPC but not on my laptop since I never use my laptop for anything other than business and productivity.

    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    1d. Most top video editing applications have support for CPU/GPU acceleration of playback/effects/rendering.
    Some enable this automatically upon detection of the CPU/GPU, others need you to turn the feature on. (see documentation)

    Consumer level software like PowerDirector and TMPGENC even have such acceleration.
    I need to figure out how to set quicksync up in Tmpegenc.


    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    1f. Proxy
    Some video editing programs like Premiere, Vegas Video, etc, can create video proxies (lower resolution video copies of your originals for quicker playback during editing).

    By doing so, you can even edit 8K on a years old laptop without much trouble. Playback will be smooth, and the only thing you'll wait for is the encode (which is limited by the hardware capabilities - newer tends to be faster at encoding even with the same number of cores, ghz, etc).

    By creating proxies for Vegas Video for example, I can easily scroll through the 4K video, play it, and edit it like a lower resolution video on the i7-2673M laptop.
    This sounds interesting but, I think I may want to just build a Desktop Video Editing because I'm in this for the long haul.

    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    1g. SSD drive, not HDD drive!
    https://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?Ntt=inland+ssd+2.5&searchButton=search
    Even a 256GB SSD sells for under $35 nowadays, and will SIGNIFICANTLY speed up playback/rendering on a laptop. (eg. a Windows 10 install can take just 15 minutes rather than 60 minutes on a SSD)
    This is not a problem as I have a few SSD drives from Samsung (860 EVO, 970 EVO).

    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    2. Building a new PC)
    So, since I will definately not be doing anything with 8k video, my editing needs are really basic and Tmpegenc is a LIGHT application and seems like its going to meet my needs (still have to test some things out first) here is the configuration I was planning for my PC build:

    CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600 6-Core, 12-Thread Unlocked Desktop Processor (https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-CPU-Roundup-AMD-Ryzen-3rd-Gen-...X-series-1535/

    MOTHERBOARD: ASUS B450-PRO
    GPU: GeForce GTX 1650
    RAM: 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz
    BOOT and WORKING DRIVE: Samsung 970 EVO SSD 500GB - M.2 NVMe

    The rest of course is trivial (case, power supply etc...)

    Whats your opinion?
    Quote Quote  
  19. PC build - fine for a budget build BUT 1650 SUPER!
    "While the performance boost going from GTX 1650 to GTX 1650 SUPER is impressive, the Turing NVENC will offer up to 15% better efficiency at encoding versus GTX 1650's encoder. "

    Better/Faster mp4 encodes for about $10-20 difference.

    Also, for live streaming, the turning encoder does better visually than software and Quicksync encoding.
    https://unrealaussies.com/tech/nvenc-x264-obs/

    ...

    Beyond the 1650 super, no point for the in between cards - just 2060 through 2080 or don't bother. (But realistically, only if you need 8K encodes, multiple 4k streaming encodes, or just a crazy fast gaming experience.)

    Still, I'd wait for nvidia's 2020 card announcements if you're going the high end $$$$ route because they're hinting something better than the 2080 is coming this year.

    ....

    No idea about tmpgenc + Quicksync.
    Old forum says "check Preferences->Input/output format list->Intel Media SDK (Hardware). You should see "+" for Input and Output."

    ...

    From the same 3rd generation, you should be able to use Quicksync on encodes to get similar speed increases vs software encodes on your laptop.
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/5771/the-intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-review/21
    Last edited by babygdav; 23rd Feb 2020 at 21:58.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    PC build - fine for a budget build BUT 1650 SUPER!
    "While the performance boost going from GTX 1650 to GTX 1650 SUPER is impressive, the Turing NVENC will offer up to 15% better efficiency at encoding versus GTX 1650's encoder. "

    Better/Faster mp4 encodes for about $10-20 difference.

    Also, for live streaming, the turning encoder does better visually than software and Quicksync encoding.
    https://unrealaussies.com/tech/nvenc-x264-obs/

    ...

    Beyond the 1650 super, no point for the in between cards - just 2060 through 2080 or don't bother. (But realistically, only if you need 8K encodes, multiple 4k streaming encodes, or just a crazy fast gaming experience.)

    Still, I'd wait for nvidia's 2020 card announcements if you're going the high end $$$$ route because they're hinting something better than the 2080 is coming this year.

    ....

    No idea about tmpgenc + Quicksync.
    Old forum says "check Preferences->Input/output format list->Intel Media SDK (Hardware). You should see "+" for Input and Output."

    ...

    From the same 3rd generation, you should be able to use Quicksync on encodes to get similar speed increases vs software encodes on your laptop.
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/5771/the-intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-review/21
    I was reading up on the Turing NVENC and I will definitely go that route (1650 super).

    I wont be doing any streaming, any 8k encoding or gaming (gaming on xbox) so if you think my build with thr RYzen 5 3600, the 1650 super and RAM is good enough for my tasks, I will plan on having those items in my cart in the next few days.

    I still want to work with Tmpegenc a little more on my laptop with some 1080p videos before I fully commit to this build. I found the quicksync options but don't see a way to turn them on or off. Maybe theyre just on or off by automatic detection?
    Image
    [Attachment 52141 - Click to enlarge]
    Quote Quote  
  21. Looks like TMPGENC is reporting correctly for the 3rd gen quicksync capabilities. Not much you can do about HVEC/H.265 not being supported by the CPU hardware. At least H.264 is, so as long as you output in H.264 MP4 files, you can get super-fast encodes. Test that.

    ...

    The PC build is fine.
    The motherboard supports up to a 16-core/32-thread CPU (https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/TUF-B450-PRO-GAMING/HelpDesk_CPU/).
    The motherboard supports some ram up to 4-dimms (https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/TUF_B450M-PLUS_GAMING/Memory_QVL_for_3...Processors.pdf).

    To improve the ability for this system to last years, I'd consider buying and using RAM that can eventually be plugged into all 4 dimm slots (You can start with 1 or 2 for now).


    Also, I would calculate the total power use of a 2080ti (300-350 watts) + Ryzen 9 3950x CPU (200-250 Watts) at maximum/peak draw and perhaps consider buying a power supply that can handle such.
    This would help future-proof the build - you'd easily swap the CPU+GPU later to the fastest available without having to rebuild everything.
    But if not now, then you'd have to install a new power supply at that time with the CPU+GPU upgrade.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    Looks like TMPGENC is reporting correctly for the 3rd gen quicksync capabilities. Not much you can do about HVEC/H.265 not being supported by the CPU hardware. At least H.264 is, so as long as you output in H.264 MP4 files, you can get super-fast encodes. Test that.

    ...

    The PC build is fine.
    The motherboard supports up to a 16-core/32-thread CPU (https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/TUF-B450-PRO-GAMING/HelpDesk_CPU/).
    The motherboard supports some ram up to 4-dimms (https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/TUF_B450M-PLUS_GAMING/Memory_QVL_for_3...Processors.pdf).

    To improve the ability for this system to last years, I'd consider buying and using RAM that can eventually be plugged into all 4 dimm slots (You can start with 1 or 2 for now).


    Also, I would calculate the total power use of a 2080ti (300-350 watts) + Ryzen 9 3950x CPU (200-250 Watts) at maximum/peak draw and perhaps consider buying a power supply that can handle such.
    This would help future-proof the build - you'd easily swap the CPU+GPU later to the fastest available without having to rebuild everything.
    But if not now, then you'd have to install a new power supply at that time with the CPU+GPU upgrade.
    Gotcha! Thank you for that info. I just think I'd better wait until the PC build is complete. I simply cannot work on a 4k video file in Tmpegenc on my laptop. It plays really choppy and if I do a mask/mosaic I can't get the tracking right because of how choppy it is.
    Quote Quote  
  23. "TMPGEnc Video Mastering Works 7 further supports the creation of proxy files. "
    https://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/product/tvmw7.html

    That would be the only way to make it run snappier on the laptop.
    The creation of proxy files naturally can result in re-encoding of the video and subsequent minor quality drop.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    "TMPGEnc Video Mastering Works 7 further supports the creation of proxy files. "
    https://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/product/tvmw7.html

    That would be the only way to make it run snappier on the laptop.
    The creation of proxy files naturally can result in re-encoding of the video and subsequent minor quality drop.
    I think I'm just going to wait until I build the new PC. It'll just be easier and I'd like to not have to reencode h265 to h264 if I dont have to especially since I want to use the smart rendering. I should have it up and running in a week. I'm sure you'll be seeing me here again soon after my build is complete. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OF YOUR HELP! YOU ARE AWESOME!
    Quote Quote  
  25. Quick question for you, would you recommend a 4k monitor or would I be ok with just a 1080p? I'm going to stick to a max of 24". I've read its not worth going 4k for anything below 43".
    Quote Quote  
  26. For a 4K, it is funny, but far far cheaper to buy and use a big 4k tv as a monitor than a smaller 4k computer monitor.
    They're basically the same nowadays, with TVs having g.sync, oled, Etc. Just a simple hdmi connection.
    Plus, you get the speakers and can watch TV.
    ....
    At the 24" level, not worth more than about $100 to pickup any new ips 24" 2k monitor, but because these are a dime a dozen, I'd search Craigslist and used shops for a $20-40~ one. LED backlit models are better because they're less likely to have the backlight fail vs cfl bulb models.

    ...

    If you must spend $$ on a small 4k, go with the sales since you're not getting oled or hdr.

    https://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?N=0&NTT=4k+monitor&page=1&sortb...low&SortNow=Go

    E.g. https://www.microcenter.com/product/601538/aoc-u2790vq-27-4k-uhd-60hz-hdmi-dp-frameles...ps-led-monitor
    This would be sufficient for 4k editing in a nearly 24" size (sorry - few think of buying 24" nowadays. It's bigger = better world.)

    ...

    Above that, you're looking at hdr (high brightness) monitors or TVs - 4K bluray, dolby cinema, and many of the latest movies have this for far brighter brights and greater contrast - and oled - the ultimate in color reproduction and pure 100% blacks non-oled panels can not give you along with super-fast pixel refresh rates (lg, sony top end TVs).

    (https://www.displayninja.com/best-oled-monitor/ desktop oled monitors cost more than lg oled tvs)
    Quote Quote  
  27. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    For a 4K, it is funny, but far far cheaper to buy and use a big 4k tv as a monitor than a smaller 4k computer monitor.
    They're basically the same nowadays, with TVs having g.sync, oled, Etc. Just a simple hdmi connection.
    Plus, you get the speakers and can watch TV.
    ....
    At the 24" level, not worth more than about $100 to pickup any new ips 24" 2k monitor, but because these are a dime a dozen, I'd search Craigslist and used shops for a $20-40~ one. LED backlit models are better because they're less likely to have the backlight fail vs cfl bulb models.

    ...

    If you must spend $$ on a small 4k, go with the sales since you're not getting oled or hdr.

    https://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?N=0&NTT=4k+monitor&page=1&sortb...low&SortNow=Go

    E.g. https://www.microcenter.com/product/601538/aoc-u2790vq-27-4k-uhd-60hz-hdmi-dp-frameles...ps-led-monitor
    This would be sufficient for 4k editing in a nearly 24" size (sorry - few think of buying 24" nowadays. It's bigger = better world.)

    ...

    Above that, you're looking at hdr (high brightness) monitors or TVs - 4K bluray, dolby cinema, and many of the latest movies have this for far brighter brights and greater contrast - and oled - the ultimate in color reproduction and pure 100% blacks non-oled panels can not give you along with super-fast pixel refresh rates (lg, sony top end TVs).

    (https://www.displayninja.com/best-oled-monitor/ desktop oled monitors cost more than lg oled tvs)
    Well, I was kinda hoping you would address my 1080p vs 4k question for a monitor between 24" and 28" since I can't really fit anything bigger than that in my work space. Regardless, I can't really find any 2k for around $100 and I don't live in a big city so everything I can search for is online. I can however get some Samsungs 4k and Acer 4ks for around $175, like new. I may go that route. I just wondered if 1080p would be enough since I'm not going above 28" and I will be sitting pretty close to it.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    .
    What do you think of the Acer KG281K 28". I can get it for $180 Manufacturer refurbished.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads