Re: [Mjpeg-users] 26 frames 480x576@50i pure black compresses to 167kB - 1.6.1.90

2003-10-03 Thread Steven M. Schultz
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Andrew Stevens wrote: > ... modifications that meant intra coding was being preferred slightly to > non-intra coding.This is the wrong way around as non-intra can be skip > coded (when blocks are unchanged) whereas intra cannot... > > I've fixed this now in CVS...

Re: [Mjpeg-users] 26 frames 480x576@50i pure black compresses to 167kB - 1.6.1.90

2003-10-03 Thread Andrew Stevens
Hi Andras, I had a look at this issue and there was indeed a suble issue in some recent modifications that meant intra coding was being preferred slightly to non-intra coding.This is the wrong way around as non-intra can be skip coded (when blocks are unchanged) whereas intra cannot... I'

Re: [Mjpeg-users] 26 frames 480x576@50i pure black compresses to 167kB - 1.6.1.90

2003-09-25 Thread Andras Kadinger
Andras Kadinger írta: Sorry about that; DNS trouble forced me to move some of my material between different servers. Here is a current link of my test case and demonstration: http://www.surfnonstop.com/~bandit/pureblack_testcase/ I'm sorry, the above link won't work due to DNS problems. Please

Re: [Mjpeg-users] 26 frames 480x576@50i pure black compresses to 167kB - 1.6.1.90

2003-09-23 Thread Steven M. Schultz
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Andras Kadinger wrote: > To simplify testing, I then generated a pure black [16,128,128] > YUV4MPEG2 frame with a tiny C program, and created a tiny shell script > to prepend a YUV4MPEG2 header and repeat the black frame to stdout to > create a YUV4MPEG2 stream containing

Re: [Mjpeg-users] 26 frames 480x576@50i pure black compresses to 167kB - 1.6.1.90

2003-09-23 Thread Andras Kadinger
Greetings Andrew, Thank you for taking up this thread. Andrew Stevens írta: The big question is whether 'pure black' really is 'pure black'. If it is digitised there will almost certainly be residual noise. The first time I noticed this issue was when I prepended some lead-in black/silence in

Re: [Mjpeg-users] 26 frames 480x576@50i pure black compresses to 167kB - 1.6.1.90

2003-09-23 Thread Andrew Stevens
Hi Andras, Sounds very interesting... > The material was PAL, digitized at [EMAIL PROTECTED], uncompressed YUV 4:2:2 > > However I have noticed, that during pure black mpeg2enc 1.6.1.90 uses > up to 1.4 Mbit/s no matter whether -q is 1, 4, 8 or 12. This I find > strange. The command line used i

Re: [Mjpeg-users] 26 frames 480x576@50i pure black compresses to 167kB - 1.6.1.90

2003-09-02 Thread Bernhard Praschinger
Hallo > However I have noticed, that during pure black mpeg2enc 1.6.1.90 uses > up to 1.4 Mbit/s no matter whether -q is 1, 4, 8 or 12. This I find strange. > The command line used is as follows: > > mpeg2enc -f 3 -g 6 -G 28 -b 5000 -q 12 -s -Q 2.0 -r 32 -I 1 -S 2000 -o > Have you tried it with

[Mjpeg-users] 26 frames 480x576@50i pure black compresses to 167kB - 1.6.1.90

2003-08-31 Thread Andras Kadinger
Greetings, I have upgraded from a Mandrake-supplied 1.6.1 to self-compiled 1.6.1.90 yesterday after reading about that yuvdenoise can passthrough interlaced material now. Great work! yuvdenoise and mpeg2enc is much faster now! I have cut a sports event footage containing both high-activity spor