Taking the liberty to move this topic over to p.a. group instead of stringing
it out here, in case it does grow a large thread.

  I understand your point, which is why I always try to think of this fact about
not having every codec ever made or betas of new ones or something.
  It's been noted that even Agif isn't altogether the way to go for all
concerned.  Seems Mpeg-1 has never failed anyone so far near as I can tell (I
could be really wrong about that), but the Avi files have an assortment of
possible codecs.  I'd almost think Mov files might be better than Avi since QT
is pretty common but then maybe it uses lots of different codecs too, something
I know nothing about.
  The real dilemma could be that Mpeg encoders aren't as common or as easy to
use as the Avi ones.  This also brings up a problem confronted at AOL where a
few of us POVers are thinking of trying our own mini-movie project and we need a
common ground solution for the frame compilations between all of us.

Bob

"Greg M. Johnson" <gre### [at] my-dejanewscom> wrote in message
news:387F2E4A.B46CBEFE@my-dejanews.com...
> Believe it or not, I have on occasion looked at items on the
> news.povray.org during coffee breaks, and before and after my workday
> has started, at my place of employment. I've also occasionally browsed
> while waiting for an experiment to be  completed.  Thus, I am limited in
> the software that I may and should load onto the PC's from which I
> access the pov server.  Thus, I am limited to the default media players
> which come with Netscape and Win95. Thus, I am unable to see many
> versions of AVI, GIF, FLC, etc., animations.
>
> I think that it would be kind and inclusive for everyone to use a
> standard that everyone can see!  I bet that I am not the only one who
> browses on different PC's than are used for his or her artwork.
>
> Apologies to the community for using harsh rhetoric and inflammatory
> analogies, most of the logic of which has gone over like a  lead
> balloon.  As I have stated before,  many people may have personal
> preferences for or against certain software companies, or restrictions
> imposed from above on what kind of software they may use to access this
> server.   Thus, while it is very appropriate in other povray fora to
> suggest, "Download program X to accomplish taskY,"  I think it's not
> that appropriate to suggest that everyone download every animation
> format viewer to see things in this forum.
>
> My inflammatory analogy was to compare this suggestion to a suggestion
> that everyone download a browser capable of viewing V-cards and HTML
> properly.  Or operating systems capable of running povwin3.1.
>
> I wasn't offended or angered by anyone's actions or comments, but I am
> indeed feel frustrated that I cannot see all of your wonderful work!
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

I was under the impression that AVI's were, not a standard,
but capable of viewing by most people. I don't pretend to
understand the technicalities of codecs.
I am surprised that gif's aren't a good option.

I've used an Mpeg encoder, but usually opt out for
the easier Avi option.
Hopefully I will soon find the time to use Sanders
CMPEG windows frontend.

Peter Warren
war### [at] hotmailcom




omniVERSE wrote in message <387fcd6f@news.povray.org>...
> Taking the liberty to move this topic over to p.a. group instead of
stringing
>it out here, in case it does grow a large thread.
>
>  I understand your point, which is why I always try to think of this fact
about
>not having every codec ever made or betas of new ones or something.
>  It's been noted that even Agif isn't altogether the way to go for all
>concerned.  Seems Mpeg-1 has never failed anyone so far near as I can tell
(I
>could be really wrong about that), but the Avi files have an assortment of
>possible codecs.  I'd almost think Mov files might be better than Avi since
QT
>is pretty common but then maybe it uses lots of different codecs too,
something
>I know nothing about.
>  The real dilemma could be that Mpeg encoders aren't as common or as easy
to
>use as the Avi ones.  This also brings up a problem confronted at AOL where
a
>few of us POVers are thinking of trying our own mini-movie project and we
need a
>common ground solution for the frame compilations between all of us.
>
>Bob
>
>"Greg M. Johnson" <gre### [at] my-dejanewscom> wrote in message
>news:387F2E4A.B46CBEFE@my-dejanews.com...
>> Believe it or not, I have on occasion looked at items on the
>> news.povray.org during coffee breaks, and before and after my workday
>> has started, at my place of employment. I've also occasionally browsed
>> while waiting for an experiment to be  completed.  Thus, I am limited in
>> the software that I may and should load onto the PC's from which I
>> access the pov server.  Thus, I am limited to the default media players
>> which come with Netscape and Win95. Thus, I am unable to see many
>> versions of AVI, GIF, FLC, etc., animations.
>>
>> I think that it would be kind and inclusive for everyone to use a
>> standard that everyone can see!  I bet that I am not the only one who
>> browses on different PC's than are used for his or her artwork.
>>
>> Apologies to the community for using harsh rhetoric and inflammatory
>> analogies, most of the logic of which has gone over like a  lead
>> balloon.  As I have stated before,  many people may have personal
>> preferences for or against certain software companies, or restrictions
>> imposed from above on what kind of software they may use to access this
>> server.   Thus, while it is very appropriate in other povray fora to
>> suggest, "Download program X to accomplish taskY,"  I think it's not
>> that appropriate to suggest that everyone download every animation
>> format viewer to see things in this forum.
>>
>> My inflammatory analogy was to compare this suggestion to a suggestion
>> that everyone download a browser capable of viewing V-cards and HTML
>> properly.  Or operating systems capable of running povwin3.1.
>>
>> I wasn't offended or angered by anyone's actions or comments, but I am
>> indeed feel frustrated that I cannot see all of your wonderful work!
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Peter Warren wrote:
> 
> I was under the impression that AVI's were, not a standard,
> but capable of viewing by most people. I don't pretend to
> understand the technicalities of codecs.
> I am surprised that gif's aren't a good option.
> 
> I've used an Mpeg encoder, but usually opt out for
> the easier Avi option.
> Hopefully I will soon find the time to use Sanders
> CMPEG windows frontend.
> 
> Peter Warren
> war### [at] hotmailcom
> 

I think AVI is as simple for Windows users as Quicktime is for Mac. 
Which leaves the other people (Unix/Linux) in between? MPEG could be a
crossplatform standard but, as with the other formats is 'spoiled' by
the different codecs used. I don't even know what type of MPEG to make.
Animated GIFs have the big drawback of being very large most of the
time. I was hoping Sanders utility would help me out. It looks very
impressive, in fact a bit too impressive to me ;) As I mentioned above I
don't really know what all the options stand for and can do. Since
there's no need for _me_ to use MPEG other then for posting here I'll
stick with AVI most of the time and convert that to MPEG if the quality
loss isn't too painful. I try to not to use rare codecs and hope that
helps. Most of the time I still think AVI looks better then MPEG.

Remco

Post a reply to this message

Remco de Korte wrote:

> I was hoping Sanders utility would help me out. It looks very
> impressive, in fact a bit too impressive to me ;) As I mentioned above I
> don't really know what all the options stand for and can do.

Bob seems to understand the settings of CMPEG very well. Maybe we can
get Bob to write an FAQ on the subject.

-- 
Ken Tyler -  1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

Me?  Write a FAQ?  You're asking for trouble... and serious confusion.
  Well there isn't really all that much to CMpeg, at least if you just want the
default encoding.  The Win CMpeg4 front-end to CMpeg is easier still to use.
  On the DOS command-line it might look like this:

 cmpeg -v0t0d0m0f2 ipb.ctl input%03d.tga output.mpg

  "input" being the rendered frames file name prefix (name less number) and
"output" the animation name you give it.
  The "%03" part is the number of digits that are in the rendered output of
POV-Ray, in this case anywhere from 100 to 999 frames.  The zero is the left
padding, i.e. 000 has a leftmost zero (instead of 100 or 200, etc.).  For some
reason this isn't mentioned in the documentation and it's the only way I ever
got it to work right.
  Instead of doing it this way there's the file list method which is what
Sanders utility offers to do.  It simply includes all the files to be encoded
into a text file which circumvents the need for -t0 (zero starting frame,
input000.tga in this case) and %##d parameters and allows for any set of mixed
frames without need to figure what's what.
  The -v is for setting verbose output, I use -v0 so it's turned off completely
to speed things up.  You just don't know the progress is the only drawback.  All
the switches can be separate or combined as I show here.
  -d is cost function and -m is block-matching, neither of which I know anything
about except that defaults of 0 is fastest and 1 is slower but without much gain
at all in quality or file size.  So it's an easy choice to just use 0 for both.
  -f is the frame rate chosen as a single number for each setting: 2 is 24 fps,
5 is 30 fps and there are several more.
  ipb.ctl is the control file (default you might say) and there are two other
choices, one to get a Xing compatible encoding (-x switch has to be used also
[not avail in Sanders CMpeg4 front-end]) and the other pvrg.ctl is PVRG decoder
specific (no switch needed), but the ipb.ctl file would be the wisest choice for
generality.  Another aspect is that the you can make your own control file by
editing ipb.ctl and save it as another *.ctl.  The cmpeg.doc tells what the
contents mean (if you can understand it okay, not all that difficult to at least
play with).

  Now, far as Sanders CMpeg front-end...
Nothing to it.  Set each field up with a file name, gather up the rendered
frames in the file list box by browsing to the input frames folder.  Add them
in, remove any strays, click on the step by step buttons, and you'll get a mpeg
animation in the end that can even be played right after it's made (if you have
Media Player installed) without leaving so you can do another set of files if
you want.
  Some things can't be done though.  Like compile a variation of frames.  Only
one set at a time in one order.  In other words you can't make the animation go
from end to beginning, or beginning/end/beginning again.  Although you could
just edit the list outside of the utility after it's creation step.  And the
same goes for the batch file and control file too, no editing within the
utility.  Not that you'd ever need to anyway (maybe).
  The only thing you need to know to use it is in the [Help] button and it does
just fine for straightforward mpeg making.  I should have said this first  :-)
  If you wonder about the cost function and block matching, the choices 1 and 1
for these is slower with potential loss in quality I think, and doesn't reduce
file size enough to matter; 1% to 2% smaller file as the Doc puts it and I've
seen that result myself (imperceptible visually?).

Bob

"Ken" <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote in message
news:388ED7B9.5CAEF213@pacbell.net...
|
|
| Remco de Korte wrote:
|
| > I was hoping Sanders utility would help me out. It looks very
| > impressive, in fact a bit too impressive to me ;) As I mentioned above I
| > don't really know what all the options stand for and can do.
|
| Bob seems to understand the settings of CMPEG very well. Maybe we can
| get Bob to write an FAQ on the subject.
|
| --
| Ken Tyler -  1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
| http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

Hello Peter & Remco & Ken,

There is nothing special about the frontend CMPG: if you have used Eckart's
CMPEG before it should all look familiar. There are short hints to be seen
as mouse-overs. It is supposed to be more or less intuitive, but intuition
varies I suppose.
The build 407 is the latest version: Karl Pelzer wanted to be able to use
several scenes with different masks (i.e. imag001...imag100 &
pict001...pict050, for example). This sounded realistic to me, but the
implementation is more complicated than I thought. But it is fun to do!
Just you wait and see :-)
--
Regards,
Sander


Peter Warren <int### [at] halcyoncom> schreef in berichtnieuws
388ed198@news.povray.org...
> I was under the impression that AVI's were, not a standard,
> but capable of viewing by most people. I don't pretend to
> understand the technicalities of codecs.
> I am surprised that gif's aren't a good option.
>
> I've used an Mpeg encoder, but usually opt out for
> the easier Avi option.
> Hopefully I will soon find the time to use Sanders
> CMPEG windows frontend.
>

Post a reply to this message

Hello Ken,

I see the necessity of adding a help file to the CMPG program, as some
people seem to find it too complicated. It is one of the more difficult
things to do, really, and Bob would be the perfect man if he had the time. I
suppose it could take the form of a simple text file.
I will come up with something soon, but first I want to have the multi-scene
option in as Karl suggested.

--
Regards,
Sander


Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> schreef in berichtnieuws
388ED7B9.5CAEF213@pacbell.net...
>
>
> Bob seems to understand the settings of CMPEG very well. Maybe we can
> get Bob to write an FAQ on the subject.

Post a reply to this message

Gee, Bob, you are quick like uncle Ken!

I regard this as a good starting point for an explanatory text file. May I
use your setup?
I just announced that I want to have the ability to use several scenes with
different names. That comes first.
As I said: it's fun when it does what you want it to do!
--
Regards,
Sander


Bob Hughes <omn### [at] hotmailcom?subject=PoV-News:> schreef in
berichtnieuws 388f371d@news.povray.org...
> Me?  Write a FAQ?  You're asking for trouble... and serious confusion.
>   Well there isn't really all that much to CMpeg, at least if you just
want the
> default encoding.  The Win CMpeg4 front-end to CMpeg is easier still to
use.
>   On the DOS command-line it might look like this:
>
>  cmpeg -v0t0d0m0f2 ipb.ctl input%03d.tga output.mpg
>
>   "input" being the rendered frames file name prefix (name less number)
and
> "output" the animation name you give it.
>   The "%03" part is the number of digits that are in the rendered output
of
> POV-Ray, in this case anywhere from 100 to 999 frames.  The zero is the
left
> padding, i.e. 000 has a leftmost zero (instead of 100 or 200, etc.).  For
some
> reason this isn't mentioned in the documentation and it's the only way I
ever
> got it to work right.
>   Instead of doing it this way there's the file list method which is what
> Sanders utility offers to do.  It simply includes all the files to be
encoded
<snip>

Post a reply to this message

Hey yeah, do what you can with it, no need to include me at all, just summarize.
The multi-scene concept is great.  Just be sure to query for same frame sizes is
all as it can't do different ones you know, at same time.  Wonder if you can
check the file size for a relation to the frame size automatically somehow...
Then again that could run into a problem with aspect ratio being different yet
have exact same pixel count maybe.  Hmmm.  So just warn about it I suppose, up
to you.
Anything else isn't really needed anyway, the editing stuff I mean.
Just thought, that means a version 5 might exist soon!

Bob

"Sander" <san### [at] stolscom> wrote in message news:388f3b1a@news.povray.org...
| Gee, Bob, you are quick like uncle Ken!
|
| I regard this as a good starting point for an explanatory text file. May I
| use your setup?
| I just announced that I want to have the ability to use several scenes with
| different names. That comes first.
| As I said: it's fun when it does what you want it to do!
| --
| Regards,
| Sander
|
|
| Bob Hughes <omn### [at] hotmailcom?subject=PoV-News:> schreef in
| berichtnieuws 388f371d@news.povray.org...
| > Me?  Write a FAQ?  You're asking for trouble... and serious confusion.
| >   Well there isn't really all that much to CMpeg, at least if you just
| want the
| > default encoding.  The Win CMpeg4 front-end to CMpeg is easier still to
| use.
| >   On the DOS command-line it might look like this:
| >
| >  cmpeg -v0t0d0m0f2 ipb.ctl input%03d.tga output.mpg
| >
| >   "input" being the rendered frames file name prefix (name less number)
| and
| > "output" the animation name you give it.
| >   The "%03" part is the number of digits that are in the rendered output
| of
| > POV-Ray, in this case anywhere from 100 to 999 frames.  The zero is the
| left
| > padding, i.e. 000 has a leftmost zero (instead of 100 or 200, etc.).  For
| some
| > reason this isn't mentioned in the documentation and it's the only way I
| ever
| > got it to work right.
| >   Instead of doing it this way there's the file list method which is what
| > Sanders utility offers to do.  It simply includes all the files to be
| encoded
| <snip>
|
|

Post a reply to this message

Sander wrote:
> 
> Hello Peter & Remco & Ken,
> 
> There is nothing special about the frontend CMPG: if you have used
> Eckart's
> CMPEG before it should all look familiar. There are short hints to be
> seen
> as mouse-overs. It is supposed to be more or less intuitive, but
> intuition
> varies I suppose.
> The build 407 is the latest version: Karl Pelzer wanted to be able to
> use
> several scenes with different masks (i.e. imag001...imag100 &
> pict001...pict050, for example). This sounded realistic to me, but the
> implementation is more complicated than I thought. But it is fun to
> do!
> Just you wait and see :-)
> --
> Regards,
> Sander

Sorry, Sander, I didn't want to give the impression that your program
was to difficult to work with, actually I have also never been able to


straightforward. If you look at the possible settings (I'm using DVMPEG
as reference here) it's easy to get lost. As I will now.

Remco

Post a reply to this message