Q: regarding virtual dub's frame rate decimation and filters.

Discussion in 'Video - Software discussion' started by shadowboy, Dec 6, 2002.

  1. shadowboy

    shadowboy Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    hello everyone, first of all i am new here, and i just wanted to post a question regarding when & how virtualdub processes frames when you choose the frame rate decimation option.

    i have been working on vid-capping some autocross videos from my camcorder and turning them into an SVCD.

    one of the steps i follow in that procedure involves using AVISynth's separate fields option, and Donald Graft's smart bob filter. obviously as a result of this i get a 59.94fps file as a result, so i need to decimate the frame rate by two to get it back to 29.97fps.

    what i would like to do, however, is to process some temporal-based filters on the 59.94fps file, before truncating every other frame after processing is done.

    what i am wondering, is does virtual dub process the frame rate decimation AFTER the filter chain? or BEFORE it.

    since i use a lossless compression codec ONLY up until the final MPEG2 encoding, disk space is pretty important, so i'd rather not have 3 copies of a 10 minute video lying around, and if VirtualDub does the frame rate decimation after the filter chain, i wont need to save the 59.94fps step (since it gets frameserved to virtualdub that way from a 29.97fps source), thereby saving A LOT of disk space (even if its temporarily). all i have is about 25GB of free disk space to work with (60GB drive, 40GB partition, and i DO like my games still :D)

    originally when capturing i used lossy compression schemes, but i was finding so much quality degredation down the post-processing pipeline to the point where the final SVCD MPEG2 output looked no better than a VCD MPEG1 clip!

    i have used a short 4 minute clip and a cd-rw to test how using lossless compression affects the final outcome--MUCH, MUCH better, to say the least.

    such a shame too, because i have enough processor speed to do an xvid 1-pass quality encode at 85% quality in real time with about 25% of cpu to spare, really helped with disk space, but post-process filtering and recompression just amplified the original compression artifacts :(
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2002
  2. jnihil

    jnihil Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    Messages:
    742
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26

Share This Page