END OF AN ERA, FRACTALFORUMS.COM IS CONTINUED ON FRACTALFORUMS.ORG

Hi!
I want to render a 13:30 minute long movie in 4k with 2*aa, so 7680*4320.  - yeah, quality overkill!  
I can't do this uncompressed, as I would need 500gb+ free harddisk space, which I don't have.
And I can't use the xvid codec, as it seems to leave out 1-2 frames every time a new movie segment is started.
I don't have any other options in the dialog (except intel, microsoft, the standards that won't compress either.
any tips how to get ohter encoders to work in the movie maker and which one to chose?
or  alternatively a workaround for my problem?

Cheers!

nope, I mean the encoder that you select in kalles fraktalers movie maker to store the movies when rendering..
I haven't found a way to get the h265 in there yet..

kalle, do you see any way how I could get h265 to be recognized and selectable in the movie maker? it seems perfect for compressing zooms..

thx for the codec pack tip. I hadn't updated my codec pack in a loooong time. uninstalled it and installed te latest k-lite codec pack. now I have at least h264 in the list. I'm trying if it works without leaving out frames right now..

try getting a h265 codec, it has ridiculous improvements (50% less file size, equal quality)

The ideal would be to encode in h.265 for 4K resolution.
TVs and set top boxes will expect 4K content to be H.265.
To get acceptable 4K in h.264 you may need to use too high a bitrate than TVs or set top boxes expect for h.264 content.
This is a particular problem for fractals, they are a 'worse case' for any codec to deal with.
I experience this with my old 720p videos that were encoded with Xvid (h.263).
They play just fine on the PC but stutter on the TV possibly because of the High bitrates (up to 30,000Kbps, Blue ray maxes at 40,000Kbs, Youtube recommends 5000).
Why would a TV manufacturer overbuild their h.264 decoder to handle extra high bitrates that 4k needs?
It may be an idea to encode in H.264 but at a high bitrate (or lossless) just to have a manageable file size, compared to uncompressed.
Then re-encode in H.265 using the command line utility cKleinhuis linked http://www.free-codecs.com/download/x265_hevc_encoder.htm

I wouldn't recommend stitching together segments encoded with h.264, it has weird bidirectional prediction that can result in sudden jumps and stalls at the join.

BTW to save disk space I use 7zip to zip up the .kfb files after I'm done with a Kalles Fraktaler movie, its saves about 45% on drive space.

For the source frames, you should keep the PNG frames but have them resized down to final res first (4K instead of 8K).

For encoding I use super high bitrate H264, and the only way you can really host it is with your own webserver - YouTube and especially Vimeo do a pretty terrible job with fractal video, which is definitely a "worst case" scenario for video compression as panzerboy noted.

Still, it works reasonably well, there are plenty of examples on the Chaotica video page (along with links to download the HQ MP4 files directly): http://www.chaoticafractals.com/videos

I've been using Lagarith Codec for lossless encoding with Movie Assembler.

I've been rendering at 3840x2160 with 50% reduction while encoding to Lagarith: 1920x1080, 300 frames per output file.
Virtualdub is quite okay for encoding from Lagarith to h264 /h265.
I've managed to create a 8.5 hours long slow-motion animation, quite okay for animated desktop using VLC.

I'm currently running an experiment: rendering to 7680x4320
I'll be using Movie Assembler for encoding using lagarith to 1920x1080 because AA is very necessary when producing a slowmotion zoom. Otherwise the aliasing effects are quite disturbing with such animations.

I'm not sure yet how movie assembler will deal with such big .kfb files.
If I'd be running Visual Studio and if I'd be patient enough to deal with that package, I'd be trying to ensure that such resolutions would be supported. However.... I'm too lazy or worse 

As it seems, KF is using solid guessing nowadays (I could be wrong); the latest (3rd) run seems to skip quite an amount of pixels inside the Mandelbrot set (usually colored black). That's why I'm currently running on 7680x4320.

If my experiment turns out to be a success, then I'll let you guys know.

Yeah, I did my last ones that way too. problem was that when I afterwards reencoded it with ffmpeg (a tip by seryzone) the files wouldn't play on my tv via the ps3 mediaserver anymore, seems to "invert" all the colours...
it's all so darn complicated...  
How did you get h265 into virtual dub??
I tried but wasn't succesful yet.

wow, that sounds very coool!
you mean do a extremle slow zoom with kf+movie assembler and then use that as a background on windows?! what a cool idea! gotta try that! do you just use vlc in fullscreen then, or is there any way to make it  a real background?
hehe, this will kill quite some time, just watching my desktop....  
edit: found it! will try!

oh, and did you render the 8.5hours with kf movie assembler? this must have taken ages!
or did you do this in another way?
sorry for the countless questions!
but those are really interesting ideas you have going there!

it seems to work quite fine, depending on the codec. but it takes aaages to render, especially when colour cycling.
10sec per frame at least...

please do! also what doesn't work..
I'll do to!
nice to share experience, saves us all a lot of time..  



haha, never underestimate the freakyness of some freaks out there..  
actually, the newest generation of tvs is 4k, which is 3840*2160.
there's not much content out in that resolution yet, but how cool will this be for kf-zooms!

and: I want my zooms to play in full domes projections and planetarys, like https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10153164197330250.1073741884.8345730249
and those projectors need at least 3840*3840.
I wonder if there is any chance you will get rid of the fixed resolution? no need to make it completely variable, but same x as y, 1920*1920 would be really great and also help when switching on rotation.

cool, thx for clearing that up, wasn't sure about it

I tried that too, but i don't know how to achieva a good output quality. even in the highest setting it does horrible things to the details and the gradients.


your calculation is correct.
but now take it times 4, because of 7680*4320. and thats space I don't have... maybe I need another harddrive - but i have no more free sata-ports.
as if my 10tb weren't enough... I'm a data messie...
and my obsession with your programm really doesn't help!!!  

thx.. you mean aeronaut? or the other?
I've uploaded aeronaut to the server in high qualita and can pm you the link if you like..


cheers!