Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

X264 vs. H264...

Zipping prevents corrupted downloads.

But I think it could be zipped on OSX with Windows compatible option.
 
Video files will compress nicely in ZIP archives, but only if they are uncompressed to start with.

ZIP files can prevent archive corruption only if you include error protection as an option (which increases the file size of the package).
 
Maik Müller Menendez said:
I was able to unpack the file (which i've downloaded on my win-machine) on osx.

To summarize:
- no download-problems with windows and red's server
- 5,26GB vs 4,89GB is just a misunderstanding because apple and microsoft use different dividers for their calculations (and btw, apple is wrong here)
- the correct filesize in bytes is: 5.257.244.957 bytes it's md5-checksum is: 21aef277f2f35e28a2427cd638d2fb28
- no need to re-download if your file matches
- unpack problems are a result of incompatibilities with the used zip-program
- i still don't know a win-program that unpacks this file, sorry
Click to expand...

md5 checksum: 21AEF277F2F35E28A2427CD638D2FB28 *TATTOO2K-PRLT.mov.zip

Looks like we match alright.
 
I've sought out advice on Ars Technica. I'll post back here with a solution if one ever arises.
 
Jannard said:
If some one doesn't figure this stuff out.. we will.

Jim
Click to expand...

This reminds me of that story where Jim buys some camcorder which needs special software to make the footage useable so he decides to invent his own camera instead ;-)

Someone PLEASE deliver us from our gamma hell!! :mad5::devil:
 
Andrew M. said:
How did you do it?
What unzip program did you use on Windows?
Click to expand...
I gave up on searching and used a Mac.

I have a mirror with the unpacked file ready, i'm just waiting for permission to post the link. ;-)
Jarred? Jim? Can i do it?
 
3D LUT H.264 precompensation -> example trailer

3D LUT H.264 precompensation -> example trailer

Hi,

following up with one of my previous posts, I found the comparison between the original uncompressed trailer and the resulting H.264 using the preprocessing 3D LUT:

comparison-h264-745-versus-original-cold-storage.jpg



You can watch a side-by-side video with original image, h.264 75% encoded image, difference and 5 times gained difference here:

http://www.magnamana.com/

and follow the news link lower left (above the FinalDCP link).

Give it a shot:
This comparison video itself was iteratively compressed again as H.264 using the same LUT.
Now when you try doing it, you will see how BAD it looked like when sending through H.264 encode WITHOUT a 3D LUT.

Cheers,
Axel[/QUOTE]
 
If you have a dual monitor set up, just drag the quicktime so at least a row of pixels in on the other screen. Gamma fixed :)
 
That's weird! What are they smoking in Cupertino?
 
I ran md5 checksum and received: 21AEF277F2F35E28A2427CD638D2FB28
So now I know for sure that the file I have is intact.

Us, Windows PC users, need a way to extract the darn thing without moving the file to a Mac.
7-zip, WinRAR, WinZip - DO NOT WORK!!
Anybody know how to do this?

Eric
 
Axel Mertes said:
Now when you try doing it, you will see how BAD it looked like when sending through H.264 encode WITHOUT a 3D LUT.

Cheers,
Axel
Click to expand...

Any plans to release or commercialize this LUT? Or is it just to be a tease? :)
 
Alright - here are my results for the bake-off. My final X264 is ~190MB with an average bitrate of only 2.9 Mbps.

The settings used were:

cabac=1 / ref=3 / deblock=1:0:0 / analyse=0x3:0x133 / me=umh / subme=10 / psy=1 / psy_rd=1.00:0.00 / mixed_ref=1 / me_range=24 / chroma_me=1 / trellis=2 / 8x8dct=1 / cqm=0 / deadzone=21,11 / fast_pskip=1 / chroma_qp_offset=-2 / threads=9 / sliced_threads=0 / nr=0 / decimate=1 / interlaced=0 / constrained_intra=0 / bframes=8 / b_pyramid=2 / b_adapt=2 / b_bias=0 / direct=3 / weightb=1 / open_gop=1 / weightp=2 / keyint=250 / keyint_min=23 / scenecut=40 / intra_refresh=0 / rc_lookahead=60 / rc=crf / mbtree=1 / crf=18.0 / qcomp=0.60 / qpmin=0 / qpmax=51 / qpstep=4 / ip_ratio=1.40 / aq=1:1.00
Click to expand...

GUI used is MeGUI on Windows 7 64-bit, X264 build is 1924.

Source PNG
X264 PNG
Difference PNG

I am sure I can tweak the settings further to get the file size down to 150MB. Of course, this is an extreme compression. Double the bitrate for a 400MB file and it will be that much closer to the original.

Will upload the final MP4 to Mediafire - any better suggestions?

P.S.: The source was the 1GB 2K H264 - not an ideal place to start by any means!
 
Chuck Z said:
Holy crap! Were there really that many artifacts in the source file?
Click to expand...

Just so it wasn't clear - the source file was the 1GB 2K H264. And yes, it's quite lossy.

That said - it looks great in motion!

The above was just to demonstrate the capability of X264 with the right settings. Even at 3 Mbps - which is nothing - it holds up a 2K image very well.
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
Any plans to release or commercialize this LUT? Or is it just to be a tease? :)
Click to expand...


Tease worked :) you are all used to it, HERE, anyway...

I'd say I give it a shot with Tattoo and we'll see then if its worth it.
But if you are interested, you can contact me privately.

Honestly its a while back we made those LUTs and I have to dig them out anyway, I have a bunch of them and need to find out which was the favorite (because it depends on Quicktime compression settings too).

Trying to decompress the ProRes file now and start a conversion. I will not find time to do look deeper into this befor thursday.

Cheers,
Axel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top