Discussion Forums > Technology
Encoding software
kitamesume:
--- Quote from: Helmet on June 27, 2012, 07:55:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: Krudda on June 27, 2012, 06:32:18 PM ---
Th hi10 profile (10bit) is superior because of many reasons, if you actually research it.
--- End quote ---
I dislike the implications that I did not. :) I know the theoretical drill. Hearing someone telling me a gazillion times how awesome Hi10 is does not matter too much when my eyes tell me otherwise from what I see on screen.
--- End quote ---
Hi10P's true advantage is the heavy reduction in color banding, i have never seen any sort of banding with Hi10P for a while now.
also preserving more grains in grainy videos, or simply put, Hi10P excels in anything color related.
edit: why is that exactly? well what they did is they expanded the 8bit color space to 10bit color space, which means they can store more details of color on the same file size. but since the first encoding usually looks horrible, encoders try to increase the bitrate to drastically improve video quality without pushing the filesize too high, if they did the same to an 8bit encode it'll easily reach twice the Hi10P's filesize.
if you can't see any difference tho, its usually two reasons, one is you're watching on a 20" inch screen from more than 3meters away or you're heck blind.
Helmet:
--- Quote from: kitamesume on June 28, 2012, 04:12:22 AM ---
--- Quote from: Helmet on June 27, 2012, 07:55:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: Krudda on June 27, 2012, 06:32:18 PM ---
Th hi10 profile (10bit) is superior because of many reasons, if you actually research it.
--- End quote ---
I dislike the implications that I did not. :) I know the theoretical drill. Hearing someone telling me a gazillion times how awesome Hi10 is does not matter too much when my eyes tell me otherwise from what I see on screen.
--- End quote ---
Hi10P's true advantage is the heavy reduction in color banding, i have never seen any sort of banding with Hi10P for a while now.
also preserving more grains in grainy videos, or simply put, Hi10P excels in anything color related.
edit: why is that exactly? well what they did is they expanded the 8bit color space to 10bit color space, which means they can store more details of color on the same file size. but since the first encoding usually looks horrible, encoders try to increase the bitrate to drastically improve video quality without pushing the filesize too high, if they did the same to an 8bit encode it'll easily reach twice the Hi10P's filesize.
if you can't see any difference tho, its usually two reasons, one is you're watching on a 20" inch screen from more than 3meters away or you're heck blind.
--- End quote ---
Dude, why some of you get so defensive when some technical feature is criticized? For your knowledge, I'm watching on a 37 inch screen from about 4 meters or a 22 inch monitor from half a meter. And I have good eyesight. And I stand by what I said, that Hi10 is massively overrated.
Yes, in theory, the advantages are reduction in color banding and size. In practice, all this is not worth the price it has to be paid in terms of compatibility issues. This is the general consensus outside of some groups of encoders and a specific camp of followers. I posted you 7 opinions above, I could have easily find 100 if I tried hard enough. Shouting that "if you can't see the difference, you're heck blind", does not change this fact - and is also a bit patronizing.
I'm not buying all the hype about Hi10. There is zero interest in it outside of some circles of the anime encoding community. If it was all that hot, it would not be the case. When I searched for opinions on the issue, the terms used to describe the attitude of those circles was "pigheaded". I censored it at first because I did not want to offend anyone, but look here, I dare say something negative about Hi10 and one comes back at me implying "you can say that only because you have not done your research", another tells me "if you can't see the improvement, you are heck blind". Well, ok. Blind or not, I have done the research suggested by Krudda and the conclusion is that only a specific cathegory of people are into Hi10. Outside of that niche segment, Hi10 is treated coldly, for reasons quoted above.
Bob2004:
*sigh* This argument again. Let me just make it clear, since (as usual) a bunch of people seem to be totally misunderstanding the benefits of 10-bit H.264. It absolutely does not mean that you see greater colour depth (and therefore displays colours better) than videos encoded in 8-bit (Krudda, I'm looking at you).
The benefit of 10-bit is more for the encoder than for the end user. Normally, when encoders re-encode video from a transport stream to the final h.264 video that gets released, significant banding is often introduced. It is possible to minimise this, but it takes a lot more time and effort, and can be difficult to achieve without adversely affecting quality in other ways. Encoding to 10-bit provides greater precision during the re-encoding process, which means there is a significantly higher margin of error, and in turn it is very easy to almost completely eliminate the problem of banding being introduced. Thus, the main benefit is that it makes it easier for encoders to produce high quality video.
It does also provide a modest reduction in filesize, which means encoders can add more bitrate, and thus potentially produce higher quality video.
The fact that the video uses 10-bit colour depth has absolutely no visible effect for the end user. Why? Because decoders decode it to 8-bit colour anyway. And even if they didn't, 99% of monitors only provide 8 bits of colour (or often 6 bits dithered to 8 bits), so 10-bit colour wouldn't be visible anyway. There is no inherent quality increase simply from encoding in 10-bit, as such. I make no comment on whether or not it offers a big enough benefit to be worth the compatibility issues or not; that's been argued to death elsewhere already, and it's too late to change most encoders' minds by now anyway, so there's no point.
Right, clear? Good. This has been discussed to death many, many times over. There's already a massive long thread about it elsewhere, I suggest people go there if they want to know more about this issue. That said, back to the topic.
Helmet: I'm assuming you've tested level 5.0 and 5.1 videos on your media player, and they didn't work, yes? If not, give it a go; some hardware players will still play them (except for 10-bit, ofc), even if they aren't officially compatible (though they may still fail with some of the more over the top videos). For videos which are already in a compatible format, or where you only need to re-encode the audio, demuxing and remuxing manually will eliminate quality loss, and probably save time. See my suggestion below for handling lots of files at once.
Anyway, regarding the subtitle issue - I don't know what the problem could be, since as far as I'm aware the ogm container only supports srt subtitles, which are pretty much universally supported.
One workaround would be to demux the file, use X-Media just to re-encode the video stream, and then remux everything back together manually; a bit awkward, but it should work. It becomes a lot more awkward if you need to do it for an entire series, but it wouldn't take too long to write a quick batch file to automate the process (use forfiles to run the demuxer on every file ending in ogm, use forfiles again to run x264 on each file ending in .avi (most encoder GUIs should tell you the command line they use for whatever settings you picked, somewhere), then finally use forfiles a third time to mux each file back into an mkv. I can probably help write one if you need it.
That's what I'd do, anyway, mainly because troubleshooting the subtitle problem would probably be more effort, and I don't like most of the GUI encoding tools available, so I don't know a better alternative (At the end of the day, they do the exact same thing anyway; they just let you pick command line options from a menu instead of typing them). You might prefer to just try a different tool instead; I'm afraid I don't know which ones meet your requirements while being any good. Maybe give MEGUI a try, if it can handle ogm.
Other than that, I'm afraid I can't really help you, sorry. I'm not familiar enough with most of the GUI tools to offer much support with them.
EDIT: Bloody hell, wall of text much? Sorry about that, I got a bit carried away there :p
Helmet:
--- Quote from: Bob2004 on June 28, 2012, 12:14:57 PM ---
Helmet: I'm assuming you've tested level 5.0 and 5.1 videos on your media player, and they didn't work, yes?
--- End quote ---
Correct. They didn't.
Digressing a bit, I major pain in the ass regarding this issue is the fact that the tech specs aren't specifying which Format Levels are supported by many media hardware. Usually, you are provided the type of containers supported, the video codecs and that's all, with no word about the type of profiles or levels.
Which hardware players do you know of which support Level 5.0 and Level 5.1? I tried once to find out more about this but, even in dedicated tech forums, people there (which theoretically should be familiar inside out with media hardware) seemed to have no clue. They reacted as if I had asked them whether media hardware possess Heisenberg compensators (Star Trek pun - for the non-initiated ;)) Do you know where could one could find out more about the Profiles/Levels supported by different media hardware?
Krudda:
I have a habit of not explaining things fully. Thanks bob2004. I never meant it looks better color wise, but rather as you said, less banding is introduced, therefore looks better...
Y'know what, before I make myself look like an ass again, I'm just gonna stop.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version