HandBrake and Palm thread

Discussion in 'Multimedia (Palm OS)' started by Varjak, Jul 16, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. raspabalsa

    raspabalsa Brain stuck BogoMipping

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    7,269
    Likes Received:
    498
    Trophy Points:
    258
    Location:
    Medellin, Colombia
    Save the image to a JPG. BH allows for a maximum file size of 97KB for a JPG. When you're in the attachment manager you'll see below a list of maximum file size or resolution for every file type you can attach.

    You'll have to use another editor to resize and crop the image, Paint is too limited. Try GIMP, it's a free editor with very powerful tools. Some say it's as powerful and featured as Photoshop.
     
  2. raspabalsa

    raspabalsa Brain stuck BogoMipping

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    7,269
    Likes Received:
    498
    Trophy Points:
    258
    Location:
    Medellin, Colombia
    I went again to the Handbrake forums <shudders> and read the whole FAQ. I learned many useful things, which I'll start trying in my next tests. But what caught my attention is that the developers said something very interesting about version 0.9.3:
    So 0.9.3 really is a big improvement over 0.9.2. I suspected as much after going through the differences between these two versions in the previous discussion with Varjak. I haven't found a changelog, but I'm thinking I'm very lucky in that I jumped straight to version 0.9.3 ... perhaps if I had started encoding with 0.9.2 I wouldn't have gotten good results with the H.264 codec.
     
  3. Hook

    Hook Naked and Unbroken

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2003
    Messages:
    17,311
    Likes Received:
    3,182
    Trophy Points:
    288
    Location:
    Northern VA, USA
    The forum is what makes it a thumbnail-- if you click on Raspys pic you will see it full size. Paint will save as a jpg. Try that and see what file size you get.
     
  4. philpalm

    philpalm Mobile Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2005
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    68
    Quote from Feb 2009 LaTimes article:
    "A YouTube spokesperson says it's a matter of content ownership. YouTube never offered the ability for a channel owner to ...

    ... sell or give away downloads before. But now that it does, people can use third-party ripping tools to get free copies of videos that content owners want to either sell or not make available for download. No, the timing of YouTube's download service probably wasn't a coincidence.

    TechCrunch's tool, although the highest profile takedown, wasn't the only one to bite the dirt. Of the ones we tested, the following no longer work: KeepVid, SaveVideoDownload.com and the Download YouTube Video script for Firefox's Greasemonkey extension.

    One website managed to skirt YouTube's claws until Wednesday. But even KickYouTube is now broken.

    Many of these tools seem to be caught in a game of cat and mouse as they try to work around YouTube's back-end tweaks. We'll see who gets tired of the chase first."

    -- Mark Milian
     
  5. FireNWater

    FireNWater Mobile Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    Anamorphic FAQs for HB



    http://trac.handbrake.fr/wiki/AnamorphicGuide
    the embed link didn't work, it's a trac url so maybe that prevents it from embedding. Can anyone enlighten me on this type of url?
    to get to it, click on:
    homepage
    /documentation/wicki/
    anamorphic

    The screenshots say it better than words for anyone interested.

    Also, .avi options will be going away in v9.4 so anyone like me who needs to learn more H.264 and mp4 and overclocking before moving on needs to archive a 9.3 or 9.2 for backup. Razzy, good thing you posted this stuff because users need to learn it for future HB rips. I'm having fun learning more about HB and digging thru their site.

    ************
    for Varjak

    How to Resize Image in Paint

    In regular Paint, default accessory with Win,
    make sure it's cropped to what you want to show
    before you change the image size

    • Click on Image
    • Attributes
    • Enter the size you want
    • Click default to auto proportion the height
    • or enter it manually if you know it
    • Save as GIF for web friendly size.
      [/LIST}
      It will lose some color info. You can also chose .jpeg as an option.
      Don't bother with the .bmp since the goal is to make this web friendly for posting.
      BH will make the thumbnail but make your image webfriendly to begin with.

      for paint.net, not sure which you are using (default with windows or the Paint on steroids).
      this one requires MS Frame too so you'll need to load that first
      for windows (instructions on the download screen before installing)

      http://www.getpaint.net/download.html

      In Paint.net:
      • click on Image
      • select Resize
      • Chose desired size, 640 and it will size proportionally
      • Save as
      GIF for smallest web friendly size.

      Common practice for web friendly sizes are to keep file size to 50-90 KB if possible. After the Save As, you get screen that lists Save Configuration.
      Upper Right lists the expected file size. Click OK if it's alright.
      Use that file to upload to BH.

      attached below is image of Resize window for Paint.net
     

    Attached Files:

  6. Varjak

    Varjak Mobile Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    6,428
    Likes Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I know I sound like an idiot (maybe I am). I have used paint before to shrink and crop pictures for other sites. For some reason, I can't find the resize function; but it's pretty redundant now anyway.

    Raspy, I don't think that the codec itself is probably that different. Maybe the program overall is; but whatever. It works for you (albeit overclocked, which I'm not gonna do anyway, so I don't regard it as a real solution). At this point, I don't see AVC/H.264 as a necessary option anyway. The MPEG4 codec is fine and size isn't really an issue. Remember, when you overclock your TX, you are going to kill the battery, so you'll get less viewing time. Plus, as has been discussed on multimedia threads, as the file gets longer, the device is likely to fall further behind in processing, so you may not have a solution anyway. For me it makes more sense to have a bigger file and ease the work level on my LD. I can probably cut my bitrate in half or so and still get a good result (and a smaller file).

    Edit: One other thing I forgot. You did your test 'backwards' for me. You fitted everything to a file size. I attacked the problem from the other direction. I'd be interested to know what the size differences would be if you used the settings you think you would want and encode your 26 minute clip using MPEG4, XviD, and H.264. See what file size results you get AND the quality. FURTHERMORE, you didn't test MPEG4 in any of your trials.
     
  7. raspabalsa

    raspabalsa Brain stuck BogoMipping

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    7,269
    Likes Received:
    498
    Trophy Points:
    258
    Location:
    Medellin, Colombia
    I don't know where the differences are either. I never had the chance to test HB 0.9.2.

    I've overclocked all my Palm devices, and since I try to be conservative about it I think there's nothing to fear. I overclocked my TX within a week of receiving it, and it wasn't since day one only because I had to ask Dmitry for a new code for Warpspeed.
    I agree, and those are the same arguments that I've used regarding selection of container and codec (AVI and XviD). However, there are two things that make me think about changing to other combination. One is compatibility: I want to be able to play my movies in as much devices as I can with the least possible hassle. I haven't read much about how common or accepted the H.264 codec is, but what I've read says that it's usage is increasing, so compatibility may be less of an issue in the near future. The other concern is how much longer will I be able to play my selection of container/codec considering that future devices may stop supporting this combination. I have a growing collection of encoded movies and I sure don't want to encode them again. Will the computers 3 or 5 years in the future still support AVI/XviD. I think yes, especially since in the past other codecs have been declared obsolete or near dead, such as mp3. Ten years ago I read somewhere that mp3 wouldn't be around much longer because it's too lossy, lacks features, and files are too large. I was worried about my growing mp3 collection, but today mp3 is still around. I hope the same will be true about AVI / XviD.

    I'll keep running some tests with H-264. Yesterday I read a lot about interlacing, anamorphic, decombing, and many other things I knew little or nothing abut. I'm going to play with these and see if I can further improve video quality. Will I use H.264 as a main codec? I don't know yet. I still have lots of DVDs that I haven't encoded, so there's still plenty to test.
    Heh heh.... battery is of no concern to me. Read my signature, Varjak. My TX has a huge, HUGE battery. Even overclocked at 520 MHz I still get about 10 or more hours of video playback at full brightness through headphones. I have yet to run down the battery on a single continuous video session :cool:

    Anyway, I'm not sure how much overclocking affects battery life when playing video. The major power hogger in the TX when playing video is the screen, and if you overclock only the CPU (as I do) then you're not afffecting the screen's power consumption. If this is true, then the only variable load on the battery would be the processor, and I don't think the 270 consumes too much power to have a big impact on battery time. I could test this, simply inserting an ampere meter and measuring current flowing through the TX during video playback, at 312 MHz, 416 MHz, and 520 MHz. This will provide a clear answer. I'm facing yeat another boring weekend at the camp, so I'll see if I can kill a couple of hours running this test.
    Yes, that is something I have thought about, but haven't tested yet. I don't think I'll see this problem in my TX at 520 MHz. The largest H.264 video I've tested weighs about 200 MB (900 kbps @ 24 fps) and the TX was able to keep (but with a few dropped frames as I mentioned earlier). I'll probably settle for a lower bitrate (800 kbps maybe), so I doubt I will have problems.

    But you're right, that's a test that must be done. I'll encode a full DVD with H.264 tonight and will watch it on a continuous run, see if the TX can keep up. If the TX does keep up, then I think it's safe to say that I have a working solution. I'll let you know the result.
    Varjak, what bitrates are you using with the FFMpeg codec (what HB 0.9.2 calls "MPEG4").
    Yes, I started with a fixed file size to get an idea of the quality yielded by each codec. I also encoded with XviD with my prefered settings as I've been using with PDE and Fairuse: 600 kbps. Then I decided to continue testing only with the H.264 codec. I didn't use the "MPEG4" codec because I think results may be very similar to XviD, given that both are offshoots of MPEG-4 part 2. Have you compared XviD vs "MPEG4"? Is there a noticeable difference in quality?

    Regarding file size, with the basic settings I've been using I get very similar file sizes when using H.264 or XviD at the same bitrates. That is, a file with H.264 @600 kbps weighs almost the same as a file with XviD @600 kbps. I don't know if enabling more advanced settings (decomb, more B-frames, etc) will affect this. I'm guessing there won't be much difference in file size.

    Seems that every time I visit this thread I'm left with more questions than answers. Also, too many tests to run, but it's nice to be learning more about HB and H.264, which up to now were a mystery to me. For that I have to thank you, Varjak, if not for your continuously mentioning them I wouldn't have started running these tests.
     
  8. Varjak

    Varjak Mobile Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    6,428
    Likes Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As to your last part, yes, I feel the same way. It gets more confusing, not less. I have to disagree about your future for XviD and AVI. I think they're already dying. If it's true that HB is dumping AVI, that says something.

    I think using the MPEG4 and making an MP4 file should be supported on most devices.

    The other thing is that AVC (I'm going to use AVC from now on, it's easier to type) is only supported at the most rudimentary level for Palm, overclocked or not. There's a highly technical thread that covers this.

    Frankly (and I'll have to play with this) I doubt that the overclocking makes that much of a difference (from essentially unplayable to smooth-playing). Maybe the newest HB is that much better. I don't know.
     
  9. Varjak

    Varjak Mobile Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    6,428
    Likes Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Also, I wanted to cover your 'trials' again. As I see it, you are not really being 'fair.' If you take a size-intensive codec like MPEG4 and force it to the same file size as AVC (which gives smaller files but uses more processor); you are clearly disadvantaging the other trials. You're selecting for file size, which is AVC's strong suit. The 'real' test is to compare let's say a 1000 bitrate MPEG4 file to a 500 bitrate AVC file.
     
  10. raspabalsa

    raspabalsa Brain stuck BogoMipping

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    7,269
    Likes Received:
    498
    Trophy Points:
    258
    Location:
    Medellin, Colombia
    Well, I hope AVI doesn't die too fast. I may start using a different container/codec in the near future, but I sure don't want to re-encode all my videos again.

    But the other point is, Handbrake is dumping AVI, but it still allows using the XviD codec in an MP4 container. Is there is a way to extract - not re-encode, but directly extract - the XviD stream from an AVI and paste it to an MP4 file? If this can be done easily and quickly then it may be a good way to migrate away from AVI, while avoiding the cumbersome and slow task of re-encoding.
    By MPEG4 you mean the codec shown in your HB 0.9.2, right? Isn't this the FFMPEG codec? Let me quote from Handbrake's guide:
    The above is not a continuous quote, but excerpts taken from HB's online guide about containers and encoders.

    So HB 0.9.2 is using the FFMPEG codec when it says it's using "MPEG4". HB 0.9.3 clearly names it "MPEG-4 (FFMPEG)". Since FFMPEG and XviD are both variations of MPEG-4 part 2, aren't you concerned that FFMPEG will also become obsolete and die soon?
    Can you provide a link to that thread? I'd like to know what features are not supported in our Palms.
    Well, give it a try, and let me know what you find. Warpspeed has a trial period, testing won't take long, be sure to modify only the CPU speed - do not modify the BUS speed.
    You're probably right about that. But I just started testing H.264 a couple of days ago. There's still room (and time) for a lot of testing. Tonight I'll encode my test clip at much higher bitrates for XviD and FFMPEG, see how well they compare against the highest bitrate I can play with H.264 (900 kbps). I'll also enqueue a full movie with H.264 to see if playback is smooth during a continuous run.
     
Similar Threads: HandBrake Palm
Forum Title Date
Multimedia (Palm OS) HandBrake Updates to 0.9.4 with Over 1,000 Changes, 64-Bit Support Nov 25, 2009
Multimedia (Palm OS) MediaFork = Handbrake Feb 19, 2007
Multimedia (Palm OS) Handbrake Question...getting the best Picture on TX Dec 4, 2006
Multimedia (Palm OS) palm tx and bluetooth headphones Sep 14, 2009
Multimedia (Palm OS) DVD to a Palm Basics Sep 4, 2009

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page