Brian J. Murrell wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 08:54:45AM +0200, Justin Schoeman wrote:
> 
>>The sort of jerkiness you are talking about is typically the result of 1 
>>of 2 things:
>>
>>1) Hard disk speed is too slow. To fix this, use hdparm to optimise your 
>>drive settings, or use a compression algorithm with higher compression 
>>ratios.
>>
> 
> Well, if I were using an mpeg/divx/div4 bitrate of (say) 1800kbps that
> is only 230,400 bytes/s required disk throughput.  Even over NFS I can
> achieve 6.7 megabytes/s:
> 
> $ time dd if=/dev/zero of=/video/test.avi bs=1024k count=100
> 100+0 records in
> 100+0 records out
> 0.00user 0.85system 0:14.82elapsed 5%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
> 0inputs+0outputs (144major+25minor)pagefaults 0swaps
> [brian@pc NVrec-20011102]$ ls -l /video/test.avi
> -rw-rw-r--    1 brian    brian    104857600 Nov 20 03:09
> /video/test.avi
> 
> So disk can hardly be the issue right?  Or is there something other
> than raw throughput that I am missing?


No - this is more than fast enough.


>>You may notice that these two are contradictory - so you need a fast HDD 
>> or a fast CPU, or preferably, both.
>>
> 
> I think I have both.  My CPU is an AMD Athlon-800 (Thunderbird).
> 
> 
>>I have an Athlon 600, and use DIVX4rec with the "-dq3" option.
>>
> 
> I tried that just now.  I am floored by the quality -- compared to
> what I have been getting in the past.  I like!  I like!  I am sure I
> tried all of the XXXrec tools in the past and none were working all
> that well.  Hmmmm.  You know now that I think of it, I think the
> problem I had with the DIVX*rec tools was that the playback seemed to
> "smear" with Mplayer.  Any ideas on that?  It seems alright now but if
> it were to happen again it would help to know what to look for.


I am not sure what "smear" you are talking about...  It could be 
interlace problems, in which case using the "-deinterlace" option for 
DIVX4rec should help.

>>It never 
>>drops any frames,
>>
> 
> I only got frame drops when I asked the computer to do something else
> simultaneously.  :-)
> 
> 
>>and the quality is still pretty good.
>>
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> 
>>On a PIII-800, 
>>I use "-dq 5", and the quality is awesome...)
>>
> 
> I compared -dq 3 and -dq5 recording from analog cable and I don't
> think I see much of a difference.  I think to be sure I would need to
> encode the same clip from cable twice so I could actually compare side
> by side.  Who cares though?  -dq3 looks good.  :-)


The quality setting really show when you lower the bitrate.  Using "-dq 
5", I drop the bitrate to 256kbit/s, and it still looks good (most of 
the time).


> 
>>mp1e is the best low-cpu option I 
>>have ever seen,
>>
> 
> Indeed!
> 
> 
>>but I have had many problems with A/V synch.
>>
> 
> Me too!  I guess we can just hope and wait for RTE to work with
> RTErec.
> 
> Something I did notice in going back over the XXXrec tools:  DIVX4rec
> seems to have an A/V lag.  The audio and video seem to be out
> somewhere between a half a second to a second.  Using DIVXrec seems to
> be just fine however.

Aargghh....  This is the second time I have received a bug report along 
these lines, but I have never managed to duplicate it!  I use DIVX4rec 
for day to day VCR usage, as well as continuous live streaming of TV, 
and never notice any synch offsets (on any of the PCs I use).  The last 
bug report said that the AVI header may be wrong, but I am not clued up 
enough on AVI to know what is wrong with it...

If anybody has any idea what the problem could be please let me know!
8-)

-justin



_______________________________________________
Video4linux-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list

Reply via email to