Re: [Mjpeg-users] Good intermediate format to use
On 23/01/2009, at 5:54 AM, Bernhard Praschinger wrote: The mjpegtools cannot create DV encoded files (at least I don't know how). They can only read them. The the best quality is a mjpeg encoded AVI/MOV at a high quality factor of 95. (100 might cause problems) if you are wanting to use DV files as an intermediate format with the mjpeg (yuv) tools, I recommend ffmpeg from memory the command would look something like this: mjpegtoolchain | ffmpeg -f yuv4mpegpipe -i - -vcodec dvvideo file.dv FFmpeg determines the destination format based on the file extension. Well If you really want every bit of quality you can create single raw ppm files. I would not recommend that. Nor would I because ppm would be in RGB without chroma subsampling. So you would be colour space converting and chroma upsampling. This would result in loss of colour gamut (probably minimal) and a larger file than needed. You could use the raw yuv stream, that are produced by mjpegtools. However there are plenty of open source lossless codecs that would be better. I think huffyuv is one, which ffmpeg supports. There is even a zlib codec. You could use use the mjpeg codec with ffmpeg, there is a -sameq option to ffmpeg, which (i believe) turns off the jpeg quantisation, so retains all the quality. Sometimes this has been useful if the source had already been compressed, only produces a file size based on the quality of the original. I have found that it produces smaller files depending on the compression of the original file. Though it will produce very large files if the source is noisey and from a high bitrate source. I would highly recommend using ffmpeg in your mjpegtool chain, it can convert to a large number of file formats and codecs. Mark -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Mjpeg-users mailing list Mjpeg-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
Re: [Mjpeg-users] Good intermediate format to use
Hallo If you only work with mjpeg files and do simple cut/edit action. You can use the editlist files. Yes, I have used glav to cut the wanted sections out of the orignal captured video. mjpeg stuff |mpeg2enc -f 8 -4 2 -2 1 -F 3 -q 8 -o video/$1.m1v I've then either passed this to devedee or edited in kdenlive and passed to devedee, after multiplexing the soundtrack back onto the file. From what I have seen from the kdenlive website. The format where you have not that much compression seems to be mov as container with DV compression. The mjpegtools can read that format. And use that file when you are done with editing for encoding with the mjpegtools. Can it write it? I'm wondering what is best used to feed video from mjpegtools to kdenlive? The mjpegtools cannot create DV encoded files (at least I don't know how). They can only read them. The the best quality is a mjpeg encoded AVI/MOV at a high quality factor of 95. (100 might cause problems) Well If you really want every bit of quality you can create single raw ppm files. I would not recommend that. Basically I have put mjpeg tools at the beginning of the process rather than at the end to tidy things. Basically glav seems to be great for creating simple quick and dirty edit lists! I would not use the word dirty, but quick is correct. If you have clips and want just trim them, glav and a editlist is a very simple way. I have a very simple toolchain. I record with a Zoran based card (lavrec only), or with a ADVC-100 and kino. The third source are transport streams using ProjectX. Than I do just simple cutting with glav/lavplay, and encode the files afterwards with the mjpegtools. It's the authoring to DVD stage. I think I've found the option, there is a tickbox buried away in the devede menus to tell the program that the input file is already in a dvd friendly format. Bit of a nuisance that I can't do it globally as I have about twenty files on the DVD! If you feed the program already good mpeg2 streams than you only loose time and quality by reencoding. I'm sorry but I don't have experience with that two programs. My overall concern was that I was generating unnecessary decoding and encoding processes in my workflow. Given the source material I suspect its not noticable anyway, but it would be nice to not add too much loss in the editing process. Actually the test disk looked OK on screen. If you use DV you should not notice much. If you use the mjpeg format in MOV or quicktime files. You will notice something. You can raise the quality factor a little to 3 or maybe even 2. mpeg is a compression where you loose information, and have artefacts. Yes, I managed a little improvement. To some extent it may just be that I don't look at other people's credits at close range on a PC monitor, especially frame by frame, so perhaps I'm expecting a bit too much from the process! Credits on the test disk were a bit rough, need to burn a new disk and have another look. If you view them on a normal TV you won't notice much. If you wath them on a new Set where you have HDMI (or any other digital transmition I think you will notice it. auf hoffentlich bald, Berni the Chaos of Woodquarter Email: shadowl...@utanet.at www: http://www.lysator.liu.se/~gz/bernhard -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Mjpeg-users mailing list Mjpeg-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
Re: [Mjpeg-users] Good intermediate format to use
On Sunday 18 January 2009, Bernhard Praschinger wrote: Hallo Peter Chant wrote: Any suggestions of a video file format to use whilst undergoing the editing process after having passed video through mjpegtools? I know a raw format is ideal, but I'm not looking at broadcast quality source material so something that does compresses a little with a small to moderate amount of compression would be good. I'm wanting to keep video and sound together. If you only work with mjpeg files and do simple cut/edit action. You can use the editlist files. Yes, I have used glav to cut the wanted sections out of the orignal captured video. mjpeg stuff |mpeg2enc -f 8 -4 2 -2 1 -F 3 -q 8 -o video/$1.m1v I've then either passed this to devedee or edited in kdenlive and passed to devedee, after multiplexing the soundtrack back onto the file. From what I have seen from the kdenlive website. The format where you have not that much compression seems to be mov as container with DV compression. The mjpegtools can read that format. And use that file when you are done with editing for encoding with the mjpegtools. Can it write it? I'm wondering what is best used to feed video from mjpegtools to kdenlive? Basically I have put mjpeg tools at the beginning of the process rather than at the end to tidy things. Basically glav seems to be great for creating simple quick and dirty edit lists! Now, I thought this would be the right format for DVD but devede re-encodes. When editing with kdenlive it always re-encode the stream anyway (obvious if you think about it). So perhaps an exactly DVD compatible format is unecessary. What format do people suggest? I have a very simple toolchain. I record with a Zoran based card (lavrec only), or with a ADVC-100 and kino. The third source are transport streams using ProjectX. Than I do just simple cutting with glav/lavplay, and encode the files afterwards with the mjpegtools. It's the authoring to DVD stage. I think I've found the option, there is a tickbox buried away in the devede menus to tell the program that the input file is already in a dvd friendly format. Bit of a nuisance that I can't do it globally as I have about twenty files on the DVD! My overall concern was that I was generating unnecessary decoding and encoding processes in my workflow. Given the source material I suspect its not noticable anyway, but it would be nice to not add too much loss in the editing process. Actually the test disk looked OK on screen. You can raise the quality factor a little to 3 or maybe even 2. mpeg is a compression where you loose information, and have artefacts. Yes, I managed a little improvement. To some extent it may just be that I don't look at other people's credits at close range on a PC monitor, especially frame by frame, so perhaps I'm expecting a bit too much from the process! Credits on the test disk were a bit rough, need to burn a new disk and have another look. Thanks, Pete -- Peter Chant http://www.petezilla.co.uk -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Mjpeg-users mailing list Mjpeg-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
