Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community (https://duc.avid.com/index.php)
-   Post - Surround - Video (https://duc.avid.com/forumdisplay.php?f=8)
-   -   Video Format: Encoded Size vs. Display Size? (https://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=399770)

reichman 06-14-2018 06:44 AM

Video Format: Encoded Size vs. Display Size?
 
I have a video from a client:

DNxHD
bit rate 100 Mbit/s
interlaced
encoded size 1440 x 1080
display size 1920 x 1080


It doesn't perform well. A little choppy, AVE reads 160% CPU usage. Converted the video with Media Encoder to one of my DNx presets to this:

DNxHD
bit rate 147 Mbit/s
progressive
encoded size 1920 x 1080
display size 1920 x 1080


And now AVE is using 80% CPU. I've run into this "encoded size" issue before. What's happening? Or is it the interlacing that's causing the AVE problem?

AndrewAction 06-14-2018 12:36 PM

Re: Video Format: Encoded Size vs. Display Size?
 
To my simplistic understanding the issue is the scaling required to display the pixels correctly.
The 1920 by 1080 has a 1 to 1 pixel sizing - no display scaling.
The 1440 by 1080 has a 1 to 1.2x pixel sizing -intense display processing.

Andrew

papalou 06-15-2018 01:20 AM

Re: Video Format: Encoded Size vs. Display Size?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewAction (Post 2491545)
To my simplistic understanding the issue is the scaling required to display the pixels correctly.
The 1920 by 1080 has a 1 to 1 pixel sizing - no display scaling.
The 1440 by 1080 has a 1 to 1.2x pixel sizing -intense display processing.

Andrew

You're 100% right, except for the pixel aspect ratio, which is 1.33 and not 1.2. :D

reichman 06-15-2018 08:08 AM

Re: Video Format: Encoded Size vs. Display Size?
 
After some more testing, I found that I could run AVE all day at 40% CPU usage by going 1280 x 720p. For most programs, that looks good enough in a medium-sized post room. Size matters, scaling matters. Not sure about interlacing. I'll save that test for next time.

MatzeHD 06-20-2018 03:33 AM

Re: Video Format: Encoded Size vs. Display Size?
 
1440 * 1080 is anamorphic HD from HDV, DVCProHD Format etc., its older and only sometimes used today. It was for a better backward compatibility to SD 16:9 anamorphic.
Yes, you must only change the 1440 to 1920 picel output on the new encoding and all is fine!

Frank Kruse 06-20-2018 03:52 AM

Re: Video Format: Encoded Size vs. Display Size?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by reichman (Post 2491512)
I have a video from a client:

DNxHD
bit rate 100 Mbit/s
interlaced
encoded size 1440 x 1080
display size 1920 x 1080


It doesn't perform well. A little choppy, AVE reads 160% CPU usage. Converted the video with Media Encoder to one of my DNx presets to this:

DNxHD
bit rate 147 Mbit/s
progressive
encoded size 1920 x 1080
display size 1920 x 1080


And now AVE is using 80% CPU. I've run into this "encoded size" issue before. What's happening? Or is it the interlacing that's causing the AVE problem?

Sound like you are transcoding to an extreme DNxHD bitrate. Try DNxHD36. (1920x1080 @ 36Mbit/s) very light CPU usage and looks just fine for sound work.

Unless you are projecting super-big 36 is plenty for sound work.

Ayush Ahuja 06-24-2018 06:45 PM

Re: Video Format: Encoded Size vs. Display Size?
 
+1 on Frank's suggestion.

DNxHD36 works perfectly fine and is often what picture post use for their offline cut if using Media Composer. On the current job I just get a same as source output.

Ayush


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:58 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com