[RESOLVED] crop failure in 165?

Support forum for DGDecNV
renols
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:34 am

[RESOLVED] crop failure in 165?

Post by renols » Sat Feb 09, 2019 5:25 am

Hi.

I am not sure wether this is an dg issue or an megui issue. However I am seing different behavior in megui after the change from 163 to 165.

And what 165 does seems to be wrong. It gives me wrong crop numbers which.

Let me try if I can explain this.

In 165 it seems like something is very off.

In 163 I can choose 140 bottom and mod8 without over cropping.

In 165 however I must go as low as 132 not to overcrop. If I choose 132 bottom in 163 there will be a several Black pixels.

The only difference is dg version. Megui is the same version.

Hm, this is hard to explain.

With 163 the crop values are 140 top and 140 bottom without over or undercropping. If I use the crop numbers from 165 I get undercrop.

With 165 the crop values are 140 top and 132 bottom without over or undercroping. If I use the crop numbers from 163 I get overcrop.

As I said to start with, I don't know if this is a dg or megui issue. However it seems to be a dg issue, since I get the same "bad" crop values when I try to crop in AvsPmod.

I have tried to explain it as good as I can. I normally don't use megui to find crop. But even if I use AvsPmod and manually do the crop, I have to choose the same "bad" values for 165 to get the "correct crop with no over or under crop.

I haven't tested 164, but for now I think I'll stick with 163, since that seems to be doing what I expect it to do :-)

I am sorry if my explanation sounds complicated. If you need any further information please let me know.

renols

renols
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:34 am

Re: crop fehler in 165?

Post by renols » Sat Feb 09, 2019 5:39 am

Can't seem to edit my previous post.

Just a not that 164 seems to Work as expected as well. I get "normal" expected crop values in AvsPmod.

Something has happened in 165, which means that one must use "wrong" or different crop values to get the same result with no under or over crop.

renols.

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 4382
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 3:08 pm

Re: crop fehler in 165?

Post by admin » Sat Feb 09, 2019 7:48 am

Yes, look at the other thread where we are working on this. I should be able to release a fixed 166 today.

renols
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:34 am

Re: crop failure in 165?

Post by renols » Sat Feb 09, 2019 7:57 am

Hi.

Didn't think that the two things might be related, until after I wrote this topic.

But thanks for looking into it swiftly. As always :-)

renols

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 4382
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 3:08 pm

Re: crop failure in 165?

Post by admin » Sat Feb 09, 2019 12:10 pm

It would be great if you could test the fix I posted. Thank you.

renols
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:34 am

Re: crop failure in 165?

Post by renols » Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:00 am

Hi.

The other thread is labeled as resolved, so I put in in here instead, since it is still crop related.

I just tried 166 and then I went to try out the cropping Tool. I have never used it before. I always crop in AvsPmod.

However when I use the cropping Tool I am getting the top value OK, but the bottom value seems to be off by 8 pixels.

When I crop in AvsPmod I end up with 138 top+bottom.

In the cropping Tool I get 138 top, but 146 bottom to obtain the same Picture. If I use 138 in the cropping Tool I will get several, my guess is 8, Black pixels at the bottom. Something seems to be off there still.

When I open the cropping Tool, the bottom already shows 8.

Seems to be something with 1080 vs 1088. Where does the 1088 even come from?

renols

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 4382
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 3:08 pm

Re: crop failure in 165?

Post by admin » Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:10 am

You have a coded size of 1088 and a display size of 1080, so the crop tool shows that as an 8 pixel bottom crop. I guess avspmod just hides that coded size from you completely, whereas I expose it.

The reason the coded size is 1088 is because that is a multiple of 16, while 1080 is not. The coded size must be an integral number of macroblocks.

renols
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:34 am

Re: crop failure in 165?

Post by renols » Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:23 am

Hi.

I have no idea what that means.

But if it is how it should be all is fine.

Just wanted to test the crop Tool because I hadn't used it before.

Have done many encodes with 1920x1080 or anything else mode 8 in height, 1920x808 for example, and they seem to play fine.

I'll just continue using AvsPmod or Virtualdub like usual, since they give me the numbers to use in the avs file.

renols

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 4382
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 3:08 pm

Re: crop failure in 165?

Post by admin » Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:35 am

DGIndexNV will also give you those values and it will put them in the script automatically if you set up your template that way. The result when serving the script will be the same as you see in the DGIndexNV display after setting up cropping there.

You're kinda making FUD here against my tool based on your own admitted ignorance ("I have no idea what that means."). Can't say I'm thrilled about that. If you think there is a bug, then describe it and give me a way to test it, i.e., stream, script, and process. I act quickly on demonstrated bugs. Thank you.

If you are just saying you think I should hide the coded size completely because that is what some other app does, well, I don't want to do that, but that isn't a bug.

renols
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:34 am

Re: crop failure in 165?

Post by renols » Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:48 am

Hi.

Sorry if it comes off as if I have anything against the Tool. I think it is the best thing I have spent Money on in a very long time.

And just because I don't understand something, it doesn't mean that it is a bug. I just didn't understand, why there was a difference between what I saw the in the two programs. Thats all.

I love the program, and use it every day.

So, defenately nothing negative from my side.

I appreciate it, and like the fact that there is always swift action, whenever something is reported.

renols

Post Reply