AutoQmatEnc question

hank315 · 20 Mar 2007, 05:15 AM

To test the speed of some encoders using DVD-RB with "multiple encoder processes" I tested CCE, Procoder, QuEnc and HC, see http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...400#post970400

I got a request to add AutoQmatEnc to the list, with and without Qmatopt.
The outcome was surprising, not regarding speed but the size of the final DVD.

AutoQmatEnc without Qmatopt: final size: 7.38 GB
AutoQmatEnc with Qmatopt: final size: 4.29 GB
Both were 2 pass, the encode without Qmatopt didn't respect max. bitrate or VBV.

I'm not a AutoQmatEnc expert, maybe one of the AutoQmatEnc gurus here can help and explain what went wrong.

techreactor · 20 Mar 2007, 05:32 PM

Strange, I have never seen so much of size difference, which version of AQM were you using ??.

Ideally 4 passes should be configured for AQMenc under DVD-RB, it will use as many as required within the limit of 4 passes.

I will ask SAPSTAR to look into this as well.

danpos · 21 Mar 2007, 01:32 AM

@hank315

Not surprise for me since Jérôme ("SAPSTAR") already had said many times ago that the rate control and others MPEG2 constraints were tweaked with focus on QMatOp usage. He there was said that would go disable the usage of custom matrices since that development focus would stay on QMatOp engine as the basis of all AQE tweaks. He also said that to use AQE without QMatOp was pointless since there are several others libavcodec based encoders that done the work with custom matrices (QuEnc, Mencoder, etc).

Regards,

hank315 · 21 Mar 2007, 04:37 AM

Version used is 0.33, I will run it again (with and without Qmatopt) with 4 pass setting in DVD-RB.

BR7 · 21 Mar 2007, 04:40 AM

@ Hank
You may want to give Beta Version 0.34.0.2 a try

hank315 · 23 Mar 2007, 03:40 AM

New encodes with DVD-RB - AutoQmatEnc using 4 pass gave far better results,

AutoQmatEnc without Qmatopt: final size: 4.32 GB
AutoQmatEnc with Qmatopt: final size: 4.31 GB

Thanks for the advice

techreactor · 23 Mar 2007, 04:37 PM

For people who are wondering whats this about, see this post from hank on speed tests of various encoders/transcoder and their output sizes.

Rejig is lightning fast on the speeds, I wonder about the quality.

jdobbs · 24 Mar 2007, 10:36 PM

ReJig's quality is similar to most other transcoders... I don't think it does as well as Shrink or Nero Recode, though. It's probably in need of a tune up, as it hasn't been updated in a long time.

**UncasMS** · 24 Mar 2007, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by techreactor

Rejig is lightning fast on the speeds, I wonder about the quality.

i have compared rejig to other encoder/transcoder ages ago:
http://forum.digital-digest.com/show...3&postcount=25

click at the top right to see the whole thread

techreactor · 25 Mar 2007, 01:31 PM

I had asked the rejig quality question to Dragongodz and he responded here. And he also mentioned that he will look onto an update on rejig once he gets over with Quenc and gets more time.

20 Mar 2007, 05:15 AM	Link #1
hank315 Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 21	AutoQmatEnc question To test the speed of some encoders using DVD-RB with "multiple encoder processes" I tested CCE, Procoder, QuEnc and HC, see http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...400#post970400 I got a request to add AutoQmatEnc to the list, with and without Qmatopt. The outcome was surprising, not regarding speed but the size of the final DVD. AutoQmatEnc without Qmatopt: final size: 7.38 GB AutoQmatEnc with Qmatopt: final size: 4.29 GB Both were 2 pass, the encode without Qmatopt didn't respect max. bitrate or VBV. I'm not a AutoQmatEnc expert, maybe one of the AutoQmatEnc gurus here can help and explain what went wrong.

21 Mar 2007, 04:40 AM	Link #5
BR7 He is coming to your little town! Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Bada Bing! Posts: 2,133	@ Hank You may want to give Beta Version 0.34.0.2 a try __________________ My Blu-ray Collection

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
newb question oem lite on 1633 sohw bgs4 post it question	byron007	General Discussions	1	23 Oct 2006 07:42 PM
AutoQMatEnc Beta Version 0.33.0.5	BR7	DVD Rebuilder	3	26 May 2006 10:04 PM
Need some help to use AutoQmatEnc	triky40	DVD Rebuilder	13	11 May 2006 11:55 AM

20 Mar 2007, 05:32 PM	Link #2
techreactor Banned Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,310	Strange, I have never seen so much of size difference, which version of AQM were you using ??. Ideally 4 passes should be configured for AQMenc under DVD-RB, it will use as many as required within the limit of 4 passes. I will ask SAPSTAR to look into this as well.

21 Mar 2007, 01:32 AM	Link #3
danpos BDVD Team Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 3	@hank315 Not surprise for me since Jérôme ("SAPSTAR") already had said many times ago that the rate control and others MPEG2 constraints were tweaked with focus on QMatOp usage. He there was said that would go disable the usage of custom matrices since that development focus would stay on QMatOp engine as the basis of all AQE tweaks. He also said that to use AQE without QMatOp was pointless since there are several others libavcodec based encoders that done the work with custom matrices (QuEnc, Mencoder, etc). Regards,

21 Mar 2007, 04:37 AM	Link #4
hank315 Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 21	Version used is 0.33, I will run it again (with and without Qmatopt) with 4 pass setting in DVD-RB.

23 Mar 2007, 03:40 AM	Link #6
hank315 Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 21	New encodes with DVD-RB - AutoQmatEnc using 4 pass gave far better results, AutoQmatEnc without Qmatopt: final size: 4.32 GB AutoQmatEnc with Qmatopt: final size: 4.31 GB Thanks for the advice

23 Mar 2007, 04:37 PM	Link #7
techreactor Banned Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,310	For people who are wondering whats this about, see this post from hank on speed tests of various encoders/transcoder and their output sizes. Rejig is lightning fast on the speeds, I wonder about the quality.

24 Mar 2007, 10:36 PM	Link #8
jdobbs Digital Video Enthusiast Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 324	ReJig's quality is similar to most other transcoders... I don't think it does as well as Shrink or Nero Recode, though. It's probably in need of a tune up, as it hasn't been updated in a long time.

25 Mar 2007, 01:31 PM	Link #10
techreactor Banned Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,310	I had asked the rejig quality question to Dragongodz and he responded here. And he also mentioned that he will look onto an update on rejig once he gets over with Quenc and gets more time.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)