AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Related Topics > General Anime > Fansub Groups

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2006-09-13, 17:25   Link #341
Quarkboy
Anime Translator
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Age: 35
Send a message via AIM to Quarkboy
Quote:
Quick question!

Will Apple’s recent unveiling of their new iTV S.T.B. (or whatever they are calling it) have any effect on encouraging additional fan-sub groups into releasing more Anime in the MP4 format?
I just noticed this myself, and as probably the most outspoken "hopeful" on this board about such things, it's quite promising.

I have a feeling it won't be fully compatible with current x264 encodes, but it might well be with some tweaking... and at a quite reasonable price, in my opinion ($299), it's something to pay attention to.

I'm such a hypocrite, however... My TV is a 19inch 5 year old phillips, whose tube has started to go bad so everything is wavy and the colors are distorted. I'd never watch any anime on it no matter what . But I know a lot of people are finally buying new HDTVs, so it'd be nice for them.
__________________
Yomiuri Television Enterprise
International Media Strategy Chief
Sam Pinansky
Quarkboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-13, 17:31   Link #342
Sylf
翻訳家わなびぃ
*Fansubber
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Age: 40
Send a message via MSN to Sylf Send a message via Yahoo to Sylf
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quarkboy
I have a feeling it won't be fully compatible with current x264 encodes, but it might well be with some tweaking...
That's my exact fear. Sure, it may be able to play back AVC contents in mp4 format... but with limited capabilities. (Baseline profile only?) If that's the case, even the groups that already make their releases in mp4 format will have to change their settings just to be compatible with this device... I'm not sure how that'll fly.

Maybe if there's an on-the-fly-media-converter-stream-server that runs on the host PC, this wouldn't be an issue...
Sylf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-13, 21:37   Link #343
Nicholi
King of Hosers
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Age: 31
For the non-encoders out there that don't understand... baseline profile is just not a option. No b-frames, no AC coding, none of the cool things which make H.264 useful. I am pretty sure anyone serious (lol internets) about their encodes are not going to downgrape their settings that far to become hardware compatible. Also it would be fair enough to say that Baseline H.264 can not achive the same quality as XviD/MPEG4 ASP within the same size constraints.

Just as well I seriously doubt a company which would only add Baseline profile H.264 decoding to a home device like that. Baseline is really meant for portable devices, etc, because it is really simple. I would at least expect up to Main profile, since things like the Quicktime Player are still only Main Profile compliant. Most of the encodes out today are probably using 'High Profile' in x264 even if the person doesn't know what they are doing. On that subject there are really only two 'High Profile' options in x264 which are used: adaptive DCT and 8x8 DCT. Custom quantize matrices could be a 3rd but I haven't seen anyone use them yet. So really going from High->Main isn't that large of an issue at least.
Nicholi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-14, 04:22   Link #344
checkers
Part 8
*IT Support
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Western Australia
Age: 26
Send a message via MSN to checkers
movie playing in itunes is evil. It's QT in disguise, and that thing doesn't support x264 encodes, unless you use low settings, which no fansubbers do.
checkers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-14, 09:37   Link #345
Sylf
翻訳家わなびぃ
*Fansubber
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Age: 40
Send a message via MSN to Sylf Send a message via Yahoo to Sylf
iTunes is one thing. A full size set top box like iTV might be another thing, with full spec CPU and all. I guess I did have baseline and main profile mixed up in my last post as far as what QT supports. But still... I guess it's very true that it's too early to guess much about it yet.
Sylf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-14, 10:16   Link #346
Yuvi
Alternative User
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Near the ocean
I think it's highly unlikely the iTV will support more than what QuickTime supports, and it doesn't seem that Apple is going to improve their H.264 decoder any time soon. However, now that I've actually started testing it, it seems as though it supports more than commonly believed. At least, the only options I've found that it doesn't like are 8x8 DCT and custom quantization matrices; it does 3 b-frames fine (I haven't tested any more as of yet.) Hardly any fansubbers use CQMs (Lunar is the only group I've seen use them), so it's really only the 8x8 DCT in most fansubs that makes QuickTime unable to play them.

On the other hand, I think that streaming from a computer via iTunes' shared library requires a hinted mov/mp4, which afaik no fansubs are, at least for Front Row, and I'd imagine the same to hold for the iTV.
Yuvi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-14, 10:21   Link #347
Quarkboy
Anime Translator
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Age: 35
Send a message via AIM to Quarkboy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuvi
On the other hand, I think that streaming from a computer via iTunes' shared library requires a hinted mov/mp4, which afaik no fansubs are, at least for Front Row, and I'd imagine the same to hold for the iTV.
Adding a hint track is simple when muxing with mp4box; fansubbers don't do it simply because it bloats the file a little bit and there is no reason for it at the moment. But it's not something that would require anything more than a remuxing, anyway.
__________________
Yomiuri Television Enterprise
International Media Strategy Chief
Sam Pinansky
Quarkboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-15, 04:15   Link #348
checkers
Part 8
*IT Support
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Western Australia
Age: 26
Send a message via MSN to checkers
Don't forget the uber efficiency of the decoder :P
checkers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-15, 10:29   Link #349
Yuvi
Alternative User
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Near the ocean
Actually, the decoder got significant speed improvements in the 7.1 update, making it slightly faster than libavcodec on PPC. Dunno about x86, though probably not since lavc tends to be more optimized for MMX/SSE/SSE2/etc than Altivec.
Yuvi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-17, 10:01   Link #350
Zero1
Two bit encoder
*Fansubber
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFluff
No. My TV is a lot smaller and has a lot lower resolution than my computer screen does... and it's not like I leave the computer much when I'm at home, so personally I don't see the point at all. Now if I had some huge-ass plasma TV or something, I'd probably just use my laptop and a normal DVI cord instead. In my experience, I find computers to be a lot less of a pain to work with than set-top boxes...
Fair comment I suppose. Hardware support is of some interest to me since I have a 28" TV sat next to my PC. My PC is on a lot of the time too, but when I watch DVDs, it's usually through my DVD player/TV, and I turn off my PC for some peace and quiet when watching . As for resolution though, it's not like it matters when you are watching "less than D1" fansubs ;p. I want to check out that Samsung 32" CRT HDTV, that could be pretty nice. In fact I will end up getting one, screw LCD and plasma.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFluff
I think you missed the point. I just grabbed some number out of thin air... The thing is, there's a parameter to mkvmerge that lets you specify with what precision the timecodes should be stored; by default they're accurate to the millisecond, but that can be changed.
As I originally said, I'm not aware of what the "real" inaccuracies are, but having given it some thought, I think what bond was probably referring to was how the numbers are stored. For arguements sake, lets take 24fps. The frame duration in MS is 41.6 recurring. Now using floating point numbers you can represent that with a chosen accuracy, a better way though I'm not sure how you would go about making it readable would be storing it as a fraction, say 41 2/3. These inaccuracies are probably negligable as you say, but lets not forget that errors accumulate in time (it probably is still negligable, but I'm too lazy to calculate a worst case scenario to see if it's worth mentioning it or not).

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFluff
I didn't even mention DTS, since noone sane releases anything with it (Y HALO THAR, BITRATE WASTE!).
Age for truth, but I had to get that one in. I bet if it you were listing reasons for using MKV over MP4, you would have thrown in DTS support as another advantage since MP4 does not officially support it . In b4 zafluff, as they say.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFluff
Actually, most raws I've bothered to poke at the audio of seem to have had a lowpass filter applied at ~16kHz for some reason, meaning that lowering the samplerate to 32kHz wouldn't make much of a difference. Not that I'd do that, but anyway...
Example from Night Head Genesis ep 4: http://kalle.blomdahls.net/random/spectrogram.png
Practically all DVB stuff I've dumped with MPEG-1 Layer 2 audio is also capped at 16KHz. I would assume it's capped on purpose to save bandwith (and so it won't sound so crappy at lower rates). A similar idea to reducing resolution when you are encoding low bitrate video. If the audio is transcoded though (not original AAC as they broadcast in Japan), then it's maybe some threshold that whatever mp3 encoder they are using is imposing. It would seem a bit retarded to intentionally cut at 16KHz, since in Japan they use relatively high bitrate LC-AAC (well the stuff I've seen on a few occasions is around 192kbps), which should be pretty comfortable for AAC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
It certainly seemed to me like you preferred HE at the time, and I can only read what you write. But aye I understand your reasons for not using HE in a release. The quasi-audiophile somewhere deep inside you screeches and hisses pretty loud too at times, amirite .
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero1 a few posts ago
In my opinion HE is too destructive for high quality encoding. Obviously at low bitrates though, halving the sample rate is preferable to having annoying compression artifacts, ringing, flange and whatever; but it doesn't cut it for high quality IMO, not at the ~96-128kbps range. You may tempt me to go down to 80kbps; but that might be a grey area, which is better at that bitrate, HE or LC? Would be interesting testing sometime; I would have been tempted to guess at LC though.

Even for multichannel; I'd consider LC-AAC first, probably testing at the 224kbps area. I don't expect miracles, but what with the channel coupling I imagine it should sound decent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero1@Kisssub forum
HE-AAC and HE-AAC with parametric stereo are pretty amazing all things considered (low bitrates being 64/48kbps or under)
I commented that HE was pretty good for low bitrates, compared to using LC at low bitrates and getting compression artifacts, flange and whatnot. I dislike that audio gets low compression ratios compared to video, but that doesn't mean I'll use, or have used low bitrate audio just for the sake of it. Any decent encoder knows +/- 32kbps for example, will have a bigger effect on audio quality than video quality. It's about finding a balance between the audio and video quality. HE-AAC woudld probably enter the equation if my encodes were using Q28 or so, which for release quality stuff, is never. I have only used HE a few times before, once for a 30MB Kamichu encode (well you sure as hell ain't gonna use LC there ), and a few times encoding stuff for a streaming video/audio thing that some guys I know were setting up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
Since I think most fansubbers are interested in PC playback it seems obvious that the reason of 'MP4 might one day get hardware device support' is pretty much last on their list. In which case on a PC it is quite easy to say MKV is clearly superior in usable features as well as playback/tools/etc.
Since we are on the subject of fansubbers, which features does MKV offer that MP4 doesn't that fansubbers will make use of? Last I knew is that most fansubbers still hardsub because they don't want people using their scripts. Vorbis would be nice, but everyone seems to being a trend whore and using AAC. Also, please elaborate what you mean by MKV playback is superior to MP4. Are there more software/players that support MKV than MP4? Yes fansubbers may be PC orientated now, but is that a reason not to use MP4? Is MP4 any less suitable on PC than MKV?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
The only excuses, in my opinion, for using MP4 usually seem to be anti-MKV'ness and glorious days of promised hardware support. As I've seen it with my own eyes the former seems to be the real reason and the latter used as an afterthought "reason". I've seen the words "industry standard" and other shit thrown around so much in hopes that hosers will go "yay industry standard" and follow along praising the new format. As though other formats don't follow their own specifications and are chaotic untrustable technologies.
I'm not so much anti-MKV, I just don't see the point in using it when I don't have a specific need, and forfeiting interoperability. I know that hardware support may well be hit and miss (but still, it's not a valid reason or advantage for MKV, that's just a piss poor, grabbing at straws justification for trying to get people on the MKVtrain), but it's interoperability that interests me. You know how .mpg plays in practically anything? MP4 will become like that. But can you say the same of MKV? In the real world (ie outside if fansubbing or DVD ripping; where mostly everyone is a video newb), MKV is in the same boat as WMV, RM and MOV. Sort of a "niche" format. It not being standardised hampers it's growth. Think if it got standardised, 3rd parties and commercial software would start to support it, which in turn means potentially less newbs with "zomg mvk dont werk" questions/threads.

In an ideal world, if MKV got standardised and magically got the exact same support as MP4, then I'd be more happy to use it, but if I do not need anything that MP4 does not offer, then there is no reason to change. It's not anti MKV, I'm just using a container that suits my needs, and has better interoperability. If I thought I was limiting myself, I'd use MKV. I have a decent knowledge and I encode to my means and requirements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
The world to you might be all about hardware support but that doesn't mean every chip maker in the world feels the same about MP4s.
Maybe, maybe not. For devices where the end user puts his own media on it, it makes perfect sense to support MP4, but for stuff like HD-DVD or Bluray players I can see that being debatable since they are effectively made for the "dumb consumer"; you know, "You will watch what we let you watch". There is perhaps also a little fear of piracy; they won't want people downloading MP4 HD-DVD rips and burning them on to a blank disc for viewing on their HD-DVD player. I can't see that people who produce portable MP4 players, PSP's, iPod's or whatever it is you have in mind, expecting people to encode their stuff to something like .vob, .evo, .m2ts or something. I also think they would be more open to using the MP4 format than WMV, MOV or whatever (this is why MPEG exists, so we have an open industry standard rather than whack proprietary stuff).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
So even once MP4 device support comes around there will likely be huge confusion over which devices support whose files unless everyone starts encoding to the exact same resolution/bitrate/profiles/etc, reminds me of a particular scene. Otherwise there needs to be easily viewed information for the newbs of the world about the specs said group follows, thus they will know what is required to play them. Easy for us to look up, not so easy for them. But really as of today no one who is releasing MP4 files will even know how long it will be before their files get hardware support. It is what I call, a load of bullshit answer.
That scene being fansubbing? Fansubbers have tried to keep encodes simple, and had to work around gay ass decoders like DivX supporting 1 GMC warp point and XviD using 3, QPEL bugs, stuff like that. I think the notion years ago was that they did it for the fans, so they want them to be able to play stuff back with little or no problems, what with everyone being trendwhores, thats kind of how the "XviD and MP3 in AVI standard" came about (with a little help from DivX and their hacky ASP in AVI). Rah, don't get me started. Of course, at least fansubbers I know now just seem to disregard leechers and do it for themselves. I'm caught in the middle; if I'm encoding for a group I have to encode in such a way that even lamers can play them (without going too easy on the settings), but for myself I can just go all out and if people complain they can GTFO. SD H.264 with a decent decoder isn't that much of a strain these days.

Anyway, that's maybe why fansubbers are open to MP4, the interoperability side of it. The hardware support thing seems to be a potential added bonus for some people, but I don't think people are banking on that as much as general interoperability. With regard to resolution/bitrate etc. this is all covered in the levels section of the H.264 spec. Providing a decoder is truly spec compliant, at say, level 4.1 (for HD-DVD), then it ought to play any res/bitrate/framerate combination inbetween providing it's specifics allow it to fall within level 4.1. For example I made an 86MB 576p .hack/roots encode, using pretty maxed settings including 16 references, which falls in at level 4. Now considering the first few HD-DVD players were basically Pentium PCs with 1GB RAM, is there any reason for them not to play my encode (transmuxed if need be)? Also, if the encoder knows the profile/level, it's easy enough to put that in the filename, eg
[Group]Title_-_00[LOLCRC32][H264_HP@L4+LC-AAC].mp4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
If compatibility/interoptibility are everyone's "zomg concerns" they should stick with basic ASP (DivX/XviD) in AVI as of August 2006. Since nothing has been forced to be more "compatible" in everything then these formats.
Fail. I hope you realise what you said. Perhaps you mean more common, unless B-frames in AVI magically became a non hack.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
Catering to the idea that MAYBE one day you will be able to play your files on hardware devices seems extremely stupid, once again in my opinion. However when MP4 playback has been more readily set in place I could almost understand such reasoning, except for the fact that you are catering to an even lower common denominator of users. But as of this point you will not know if any release will even be supported in the future. Thus the magic word guesswork.
The point is I am not catering to anyone. I'm using an ISO standard container and encoding my files as I see fit, with distribution in mind primarily. Everything is spec compliant. It so happens that my encodes fall within the specified profile/level a HD-DVD player is required to support, and so it stands that I can encode SD fansubs however I want and it will play on a spec compliant decoder. It's not as though I'm using crippled settings just in case we get hardware support. If a hardware device support MP4, then all the better, but MP4 support is a hell of a lot more likely than MKV, and as I have already said, MKV does not offer anything useful to me; so are you suggesting everyone should switch to MKV because "ZOMG, MP4 might not get hardware support"? If that's the only reason for fansubbers putting out hardsubbed files to switch from MP4 to MKV, then it's pretty fucking weak. What I am having a hard time getting my head around is why use a non standard container if you don't use any of it's redeeming features. You might as well use MP4, then at least you have a bit of interoperability too. If you want softsubs or Vorbis, then fair enough use MKV, but I don't see the point in using MKV if all you are storing is hardsubbed H.264 and AAC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SirCanealot
I don't see the point in HE AAC for stereo sources when Ogg provisdes stupidly good audio at Q2, imo. I uploaded a sample of Q2 ogg here: http://www.sircanealot.homechoice.co...m%20Shift3.ogg

When you go below Q2, the sound of the drums and guitar start to get distorted, but Q2 is pretty listenable, imo. Although it's worth saying it did oversize to 108kps, but that's the nature of this music ^^;;
Lol, you completely missed the point. HE-AAC is intended for stuff like 64kbps and under (some encoders go up to 80 or 96 kbps for HE-AAC). At 108kbps I'd be using LC-AAC. Encode that again at 64kbps or so then check HE-AAC. Though I won't be surprised if the Vorbis did sound better since how HE-AAC works is clever but ugly IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mog08
until we all get massive upgrades, that's not going to happen very soon. but i'm all in favor of H.264 taking over.
Looks like H.264 has already taken over. There certainly aren't the amount of threads there used to be with people bitching how much CPU it uses, or how to decode it. Even this thread has slowed down a lot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo
Will Apple’s recent unveiling of their new iTV S.T.B. (or whatever they are calling it) have any effect on encouraging additional fan-sub groups into releasing more Anime in the MP4 format?
Hardly. Perhaps if it is capable of playing current H.264 fansubs (ie up to HP@L4), then for those fansubbers releasing hardsubbed H.264 + AAC maybe. Even if they don't, it's only a case of transmuxing the MKV. I think this thing will fail though. It's just like a mini-itx running some kind of media centre OS (which IMO if you get a decent CPU, is the better choice if you must use a STB). Doesn't look like it will have a CD/DVD drive which sucks hard. If it did play fansubs, then putting in a disc of your burned stuff would have been nice. In fact it doesn't look like there is much to it at all... So I would be cautious. I'm thinking the CPU will be mega sucky, but it would be nice to be proved wrong. It basically looks more like an apple.com whoring machine rather than any kind of media centre/player. This thing makes me think "iPod you plug into your TV".

Quote:
Originally Posted by checkers
movie playing in itunes is evil. It's QT in disguise, and that thing doesn't support x264 encodes, unless you use low settings, which no fansubbers do.
Fear not! There is at least one group who uses subme 1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuvi
On the other hand, I think that streaming from a computer via iTunes' shared library requires a hinted mov/mp4, which afaik no fansubs are, at least for Front Row, and I'd imagine the same to hold for the iTV.
Perhaps; but MP4 supports "progressive download", so you may just play videos on the fly... Also I would assume that this thing would have some form of Harddrive, so maybe you have to sync stuff or it downloads as it's playing kind of thing. How about music bought from itunes and their trailers, are they hinted? One of it's key points was that you are supposed to be able to watch trailers from apple.com on the box. Mmmm, lovely low res on my HDTV... GTFO Apple
__________________
Zero1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-17, 12:59   Link #351
Nicholi
King of Hosers
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Age: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero1
Also, please elaborate what you mean by MKV playback is superior to MP4. Are there more software/players that support MKV than MP4? Yes fansubbers may be PC orientated now, but is that a reason not to use MP4? Is MP4 any less suitable on PC than MKV?
I think you know as well as I do that the MKV featureset is completely (if not 99.9%) supported on a PC, whereas there are alot of MP4 features missing as well as some extra bugs even to work out in the current splitters available. You and me have even seen them with MPEG2 in MP4, amirite? I could just say Timed Text though and that would be the end of it, bad support. I doubt they think of it in this way but chapter support would be another, which isn't explicitly defined in MP4 just Nero devices, amirite?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
If compatibility/interoptibility are everyone's "zomg concerns" they should stick with basic ASP (DivX/XviD) in AVI as of August 2006. Since nothing has been forced to be more "compatible" in everything then these formats.
Fail. I hope you realise what you said. Perhaps you mean more common, unless B-frames in AVI magically became a non hack.
Quotes mean everything n_n.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero1
What I am having a hard time getting my head around is why use a non standard container if you don't use any of it's redeeming features. You might as well use MP4, then at least you have a bit of interoperability too. If you want softsubs or Vorbis, then fair enough use MKV, but I don't see the point in using MKV if all you are storing is hardsubbed H.264 and AAC.
Most I have seen use Vorbis, which automatically discounts MP4 on anything but a PC. Though I am guessing more people are just finding mkvmerge gui easier to use then MP4Box.

The only MP4 interoperability which exists is a few ASP players out there (not including the audio world)? It is currently a phantom. There is nothing stopping 3rd parties from implementing the Matroska specifications into chips. One particular company was going to do it (Zensonic) but seemed to have slacked off alot, might still happen might not. But the Matroska group did made a list of hardware profiles same as MP4 does.

I understand your reasons for using MP4, I am just hear because you decided to voice them openly. So I am here only as the voice of opposites. You continue to bestow the word standard on MP4 as though it is something unattainable by non-ISO formats. Matroska is part of a standard, its own. The specifications themselves have been frozen and much like a standard, will not be irreversibly changed so they are no longer backwards compatible. The only thing I have seen added (not changed or modified) is Matroska v2, which uses SimpleBlock to package the files causing lower overhead, which is not backwards compliant. But it is clearly specified so someone could easily implement Matroska v1, and clearly label that thing as Matroska v1 compliant, or Matroska v2 or both. The only difference between MP4 and MKV in this situation is MP4 is internationally recognized, that is all. Nothing special about being called a standard or not because Matroska is very well maintained. Using the word standard to differentiate such things might make sense when talking about OGM. It is a "garage" format at best, and will stay that way. Not everything else is put together in such a ragtag fashion though, and Matroska has an abundance of documentation (just as MP4) as well as of course being opensource.

Though I don't know why you can't "wrap your head" around it, I am guessing the main reason people choose MKV over MP4 is simply because it is 100x more flexible a container. Even if a particlar release did not specifically use "zomg feature" they may intend to in the future. I think the codec choice alone is what usually wins people over. There is alot Matroska can do that MP4 just can't. And since nearly all fansubbers are making their files on what...PC?... I am pretty sure this is what they intend to test and release their files for.
Nicholi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-17, 14:55   Link #352
Zero1
Two bit encoder
*Fansubber
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chesterfield, UK
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
I think you know as well as I do that the MKV featureset is completely (if not 99.9%) supported on a PC, whereas there are alot of MP4 features missing as well as some extra bugs even to work out in the current splitters available. You and me have even seen them with MPEG2 in MP4, amirite? I could just say Timed Text though and that would be the end of it, bad support. I doubt they think of it in this way but chapter support would be another, which isn't explicitly defined in MP4 just Nero devices, amirite?
If you want to split hairs, then fine. MPEG-2 in MP4? The issue was that some players didn't respect the AR flag. Almost none supported it with Gabests MPV decoder (which was suggested by you), and it was supported by a decent amount using FFDShow. However you seem to take it to heart when I suggest FFDShow, as if I'm saying your suggestion is worthless. Try taking constructive criticism on board. Complaining about something like that, is like me complaining that softsubs in VLC suck, native ASP in MKV sucks or other media players suck. It's like me saying MKV sucks because BSPlayer crashes, or the 48KHz audio muxing bug.

As for timed text, I don't pretend that it's anything less than sucky However, partly the reason support for it sucks, is because MKV and .ASS already exist. Why would someone take time implementing something basic when something better already exists? You can't just say "It sucks, just because", but it sucks because the interests is none/minimal. I mean outside of fansubbing, how often do people think, "Hmm, what a good idea it would be to have subtitles in this video?" Most people don't give a rats ass.

Moving on to chapters, yes they are specified. Spec compliant chapters would be made by creating or editing a BIFS script (in a similar fashion to what you would do for menus). At first it's probably a bit daunting, since they can be large (but probably no harder than hand editing an MKV chapter file), but in the long run it can probably serve as an extension to your batch since it contains the links to your media files (rather than you having to tell mp4box where they are). The most common way of storing chapters is via Nero's method, ie the UDTA atom. This is of course non standard. Although Nero's is not strictly standard, it's no more non standard than MKV, and since you are fond of the PC environment, all methods work. If I was encoding for hardware, I would probably take the time to piss around with BT scripts (have done before when messing with menus); but as I said, I'm just encoding spec stuff for distro, if it plays on hardware, it's a bonus. It's not as though I'm doing a big nono like muxing AC3 as mp4a and releasing it or whatever, I think people will live without chapters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
The only MP4 interoperability which exists is a few ASP players out there (not including the audio world)? It is currently a phantom. There is nothing stopping 3rd parties from implementing the Matroska specifications into chips. One particular company was going to do it (Zensonic) but seemed to have slacked off alot, might still happen might not. But the Matroska group did made a list of hardware profiles same as MP4 does.
Interoperability doesn't start and end with hardware; I'm talking software too (and as insignificant as they may be, portables like mobile phones, PSP, iPod etc, that's all interoperability).

You're right. There is absolutely nothing stopping a company implementing an MKV splitter. It wouldn't cost them a penny either (aside from some dude's salary/wages for coding it). So why is no one doing it? I'm not being facetious, I really can't see why they aren't. I have some theories, such as MKV files containing stuff like WMV which they may not have the patent for, and that might come back to complaints that only certain MKV play. What about royalties? Are there some kind of royalties that MPEG has/does that means people who implement and sell products using MPEG get a cut of some description? (In which case it would seem silly to support a format that does not bring any money in). Perhaps they are scared to implement it thinking it may become a dead format, or change significantly? (though I personally give the MKV team more credit than that). And what's with waving this hardware profiles link in front of me; I thought you people didn't care about hardware support? The profiles are a good start, if a little vague. I guess if something did come of MKV hardware support that they would draw up something specific.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
I understand your reasons for using MP4, I am just hear because you decided to voice them openly. So I am here only as the voice of opposites. You continue to bestow the word standard on MP4 as though it is something unattainable by non-ISO formats. Matroska is part of a standard, its own.
I only "voice my opinions" because of people who rubbish MP4, just because it isn't MKV. They see that it doesn't support every format under the sun and automatically regard it as inferior. It's the same as what you guys used to do back in the days when MKV was new and newbs where going around giving it bad press saying it's unstable and whatnot, so I'm sure you can empathise. If people would just shut the fuck up and encode, then I wouldn't have anything to longpost about. Well maybe the odd rant about how DivX gets my back up but anyway. You guys know me by now, I prefer MP4, but I try to be impartial and fair, but why should I be impartial and recommend stuff that I don't particularly use when other people won't return the favour? Container wars are retarded, you use what suits your needs, and your target audience, for me that's MP4, for you that's MKV. All I ask is that other people be impartial and/or unbiased too as opposed to whining, flaming or exaggerating a situation. If someone comes to me and wants softsubs, I'll tell them to use MKV; I could be bloody minded and tell them that MKV makes shit crash and that it's better to use hardsubbed AVI or MP4, but I don't. I appreciate the work the MKV team puts in, as I do pengvado, haali, GPAC, AVIsynth team, Avery Lee and any of the other great people that make encoding available to us.

I showed TheFluff that not everyone who doesn't use MKV simply dislikes the format when he accused me of only using MP4 because he thought I was another stereotypical old skool fansubber that dislikes MKV and associates it with DVD rippers. As you all know, TheFluff is an active MKV fan and doesn't really gripe (in public) about people using MP4, he seems to just get on with it and be thankful that at least it's not OGM or AVI ;p. I hope others can at least cut some slack, stop being retarded and just appreciate the work that people put into this stuff. I couldn't care less if MKV is associated with "evil DVD rippers" or not, if it has features I need, I'll use it. I would be a hyprocite if I didn't use MKV with the reason of it being associated with DVD rippers anyway, because DVD decryptors themselves are associated with DVD rippers, and I think most if not all encoders have ripped and encoded from DVD before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholi
The only difference between MP4 and MKV in this situation is MP4 is internationally recognized, that is all. Nothing special about being called a standard or not because Matroska is very well maintained. Using the word standard to differentiate such things might make sense when talking about OGM. It is a "garage" format at best, and will stay that way. Not everything else is put together in such a ragtag fashion though, and Matroska has an abundance of documentation (just as MP4) as well as of course being opensource.
Nah, worldwide status is nothing is it?
Anyway, I never really thought of it that way before, but you are right. Comparing it to OGM helps. MKV is a standard in it's own right, and as I have said before, it's a great piece of work. I should refer to ISO standard in future; just standard is too vague.
__________________
Zero1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-17, 18:28   Link #353
mog08
Member
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London
you missed my point, Zero1. I wan't talking about watching AVC coded videos. i was refering to x264 encoding.

Chevalier 1 XviD AnimeYuki 172.6 Mb
Chevalier 1 H.264 AnimeYuki 231.5 Mb

Kemonozume 1 - XviD version AF-F & Y-F 233.3 Mb.
Kemonozume 1 - h264 version (HD) AF-F & Y-F 233.1 Mb.

Night Head Genesis 1 - XviD version Ureshii 174.8 Mb
Night Head Genesis 1 - h264 version Ureshii 247.8 Mb
Night Head Genesis 2 - XviD version Ureshii 174.8 Mb.
Night Head Genesis 2 - h264 version Ureshii 247.8 Mb.

Coyote Ragtime Show 6-7 - h264 version AnimeYuki 345.8 Mb
Coyote Ragtime Show 6-7 - XviD version AnimeYuki 341.6 Mb.

Honey & Clover II 2 - XviD version C1Anime 174.7 Mb
Honey & Clover II 2 - x264 version C1Anime 249.7 Mb

this is the reason why H.264 has not yet taken over anime fansubs.

quoted from Wiki, "H.264, MPEG-4 Part 10, or AVC, for Advanced Video Coding, is a digital video codec standard which is noted for achieving very high data compression....The intent of the H.264/AVC project was to create a standard that would be capable of providing good video quality at bit rates that are substantially lower (e.g., half or less) than what previous standards would need (e.g., relative to MPEG-2, H.263, or MPEG-4 Part 2), and to do so without so much of an increase in complexity as to make the design impractical (excessively expensive) to implement."

why use it if it doesn't beat XviD?

some did better, though not much better
The Third 15 - XviD version Fansub no Tameni 170.7 Mb.
The Third 15 - h264 version Fansub no Tameni 149.9 Mb

Tonagura! 4 - h264 version Ryoumi 140.4 Mb
Tonagura! 4 - XviD version Ryoumi 175.1 Mb

Hanoka 4 - h264 version Ryoumi 40.7 Mb.
Hanoka 4 - XviD version Ryoumi 50.6 Mb.

Innocent Venus 5 - h264 version KissSub 167.0 Mb
Innocent Venus 5 - XviD version KissSub 225.5 Mb.

I can't say for sure but 50-90Mb is usually enough for a 23-25min anime episode.
mog08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-17, 18:45   Link #354
TheFluff
Excessively jovial fellow
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: ISDB-T
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero1
I showed TheFluff that not everyone who doesn't use MKV simply dislikes the format when he accused me of only using MP4 because he thought I was another stereotypical old skool fansubber that dislikes MKV and associates it with DVD rippers. As you all know, TheFluff is an active MKV fan and doesn't really gripe (in public) about people using MP4, he seems to just get on with it and be thankful that at least it's not OGM or AVI ;p. I hope others can at least cut some slack, stop being retarded and just appreciate the work that people put into this stuff.
Stop it with the flattering, I'm embarassed... :| Besides I'm not sure it's entirely true, I'm pretty sure I must've grumbled about MP4 somewhere... I think, at least.

On a more serious note, I think what Nicholi is trying to get to is that your arguments for using MP4 are kind of weak, in his opinion. I have one or a few things to say about them as well...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero1
What about royalties? Are there some kind of royalties that MPEG has/does that means people who implement and sell products using MPEG get a cut of some description?
What? If I understand you right, it's the complete opposite: you have to pay licensing fees to use patented MPEG technology - usually a fixed sum per "distributed implementation" or something like that. The only reason things like XviD or x264 can get away with using said patented technology without paying anything is that there's not really anyone worth suing, and even if there was the legal situation is unclear, especially since many of the developers are not US residents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero1
The most common way of storing chapters is via Nero's method, ie the UDTA atom. This is of course non standard. Although Nero's is not strictly standard, it's no more non standard than MKV, and since you are fond of the PC environment, all methods work.
What (again)? As far as I can tell, Nero's way of implementing it is in NO WAY supported by the standard, and is reliant on the splitter being capable of making sense of the attached custom user data. MKV's chapters, on the other hand, are actually a part of the standard (and said standard not being issued by an industry consortium has no relevance whatsoever - a standard's a standard, and Nero's way of storing chapters is NOT standard).

BTW, if you want to use the full potential of MKV chapters, like the ordered chapters stuff (different parts of the video residing in different files but being played as if it were in one), nested chapters etc. you have to hand-edit a rather large-ish XML file, but if you just want the standard jump-to-this-timestamp chapters, you can use the tried and trusted Ogg chapters format (also used in OGM), which looks like this:
Code:
CHAPTER01=00:00:00.000
CHAPTER01NAME=Opening
CHAPTER02=00:01:39.933
CHAPTER02NAME=Night Head Genesis 01: Memory
CHAPTER03=00:22:39.524
CHAPTER03NAME=Ending
CHAPTER04=00:24:09.823
CHAPTER04NAME=Preview
__________________
| ffmpegsource
17:43:13 <~deculture> Also, TheFluff, you are so fucking slowpoke.jpg that people think we dropped the DVD's.
17:43:16 <~deculture> nice job, fag!

01:04:41 < Plorkyeran> it was annoying to typeset so it should be annoying to read
TheFluff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-17, 19:40   Link #355
Eeknay
Gendo died for your sins.
*Fansubber
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by mog08
I can't say for sure but 50-90Mb is usually enough for a 23-25min anime episode.
Hey, I have a wild and outlandish idea! How about we encode episodes based on how well we feel they compress and our judgement on how much bitrate they need rather than just aiming at stupidly low filesizes "just because"!

50-90MB will usually not be enough for the average anime, even with h264 at l44t settings. I know checkers and Fluff have dabbled with the insane arts of low bitrates with seemingly decent results, doesn't mean all our episodes should consistently hit that target every time. That's just stupid.
Eeknay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-18, 07:22   Link #356
TheFluff
Excessively jovial fellow
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: ISDB-T
Age: 28
Well, there ARE shows that reach CRF 18 at about 100 MB, including audio, at full SD resolution. Night Head Genesis is one example, the 140 MB encodes are actually a bit oversized, IMHO - at least for most eps, some of them compress worse than others.
On the other hand, there are ALSO shows that need at least 200 MB to reach CRF 18 under the same conditions. So, what Eeknay says. There are no universal "good sizes". Personally I'm beginning to think encoding everything as CRF 16-18 or so and ignoring fixed filesizes is a good idea, but of course that has drawbacks...
__________________
| ffmpegsource
17:43:13 <~deculture> Also, TheFluff, you are so fucking slowpoke.jpg that people think we dropped the DVD's.
17:43:16 <~deculture> nice job, fag!

01:04:41 < Plorkyeran> it was annoying to typeset so it should be annoying to read
TheFluff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-18, 08:37   Link #357
checkers
Part 8
*IT Support
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Western Australia
Age: 26
Send a message via MSN to checkers
lols, just wait 'til you see the latest thing I've cooked up! A big hello to my favourite encoders Solar here for providing me with omgcompressible "raws" even though I have to OCR the subs out
86mb/x264.full dvd res.ratefactor ~19.hardsubs (so not even max compressibility).no additional filtering.source was solar's HD release (which is hi vision, ie upscaled)/aac.96kbits sbr (sounded better, honest zero1!!)/ mkv2.sans chapters or other space eating frivolities. http://cccp.project357.com/Honey.and...o-checkers.mkv

As for mp4, well, I guess I don't mind it being used, but the advent of mkv2 has made the overhead advantage dissappear, which was why I liked it. Hardware support is the big reason, and where I'd like to go into detail.

note for nicholi & other noobs: SAP = StandAlone Player

Lets take yor fav'rit fansub and assume it's High@3.1 h264 and some meggerbyte size which is over 175mb. These values pretty much rule out portable player compatability, not even considering the audio format. Additionally, any sane person would re-encode for their QVGA screen and get it down to 30mb (which is an easy target for most animes with even Base@1.3 on my PPC). So you can strike out portable playback of anime encodes as a reason to use mp4. This leaves standalone players, which will gobble down the files.

So the SAP is where mp4 will be an advantage for anime ep playback. Let's take a step back and look at history though. The two SAP compatible formats around at the moment are *VCD and DVD. Well, DVD authoring has always been a bit of a black art with anything that's not asp/mp3/avi, and it's reasonably rare to do that to watch anime eps. VCD authoring, well I've not known a single person talk about doing this, even when they were cool, but having said this I'm sure people will now come along and tell me how often they did this and how great it is :P. In short, anime SAP playback to date has been of almost zero interest.

You can't just rule SAP out because of history though - this format is actually official! (maybe). Let's look at the reasons SAP playback has been the den of miscreants and other ragamuffins. Point form to save time with some of the more obvious reasons:
o It's... frowned upon by many encoders,
o It's hard compared to watching on your computer,
o You usually can't use rewritable discs,
o Watching on your TV was never that fun.
mp4 aims (hopes) to solve the second problem there - making it easier. You'll be able to burn the file direct to disc and it will play. Hurrah!

This is of course with the addendum that the SAP supports the codecs in use, which are likely to be h264/xvid, aac/vorbis and hardsub/srt. I doubt many SAPs will play srt subtitles (vobsub is a possibility), vorbis is obviously out of the question and AAC will of course require additional licence fees as it is not part of the spec for either HD-DVD and blu-ray.

What is impossible to tell is the availability of compatible BD/HDVD players and the uptake they will have - time will tell and not much else will .

Last edited by checkers; 2006-09-18 at 09:29.
checkers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-18, 09:37   Link #358
DryFire
Panda Herder
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: A bombed out building in Beruit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by checkers
lols, just wait 'til you see the latest thing I've cooked up! A big hello to my favourite encoders Solar here for providing me with omgcompressible "raws" even though I have to OCR the subs out
86mb/x264.full dvd res.ratefactor ~19.hardsubs (so not even max compressibility).no additional filtering.source was solar's HD release (which is hi vision, ie upscaled)/aac.96kbits sbr (sounded better, honest zero1!!)/ mkv2.sans chapters or other space eating frivolities.
96kbps audio seems a bit high compared to what you normally use... are you sure you were feeling alright?
Quote:
What is impossible to tell is the availability of compatible BD/HDVD players and the uptake they will have - time will tell and not much else will .
Last time I looked Blu-ray players were about 1000 USD and loaded with o so delicious copy protection annoyances; any sane person with 1k burning a hole in their pocket would buy/build an HTPC instead. (Good luck finding a writable blu-ray/hddvd disk to.)
DryFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-18, 09:41   Link #359
checkers
Part 8
*IT Support
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Western Australia
Age: 26
Send a message via MSN to checkers
hey, it's HE-AAC at least :P The real reason is the file was undersizing with --qp-min 18.

As for you thinking the first gen of BD players are somehow representative of the treasures that will undoubtedly begin to flow out of China in a year or so... Oo
checkers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2006-09-18, 10:19   Link #360
DryFire
Panda Herder
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: A bombed out building in Beruit.
you encode for SAP playback in years to come?
DryFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 17:53.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.