SAF v4.00 ''stable'' (StandAlone Filters) - DXVA ready (H.264 and VC-1). (3 Viewers)

Should i integrate FFDshow in to SAF?

  • Yes

    Votes: 406 85.5%
  • No

    Votes: 69 14.5%

  • Total voters
    475

thesystemera

Portal Pro
May 26, 2008
810
22
42
Auckland
Home Country
New Zealand New Zealand
Guys, i am thinking to integrate FFDshow in to SAF. The reasons are:
- more video format support (like MJPG, VPx, FLV, etc...)
- replace MPA by ffdshow audio decoder (possibly fix reported pass-thrugh problems)
- post processing +video resize for all non DXVA material

No DXVA will be lost, all prewious functions will be keept.
This combination should create ultimate audio/video solution...

Please vote in pool!

That would be truly brilliant.. I use ffdShow in combination with your SAF all ready. Quite frankly I'm willing to loose H/A for the upscaling of the DIVX collections and YOUTUBE upscaling but if you could find a way to allow ffdShow to be used for all non essential content, eg less that a certain resolution yet remove the Post-processing on more GPU intensive stuff (any thing over a certain resolution 1280 x 720) that would be excellent...

I love ffdShow spline upscaling and sharpening on my DVD's
 

hoborg

Portal Pro
June 13, 2008
4,413
1,644
Nový Jičín
Home Country
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Guys, i am thinking to integrate FFDshow in to SAF. The reasons are:
- more video format support (like MJPG, VPx, FLV, etc...)
- replace MPA by ffdshow audio decoder (possibly fix reported pass-thrugh problems)
- post processing +video resize for all non DXVA material

No DXVA will be lost, all prewious functions will be keept.
This combination should create ultimate audio/video solution...

Please vote in pool!

That would be truly brilliant.. I use ffdShow in combination with your SAF all ready. Quite frankly I'm willing to loose H/A for the upscaling of the DIVX collections and YOUTUBE upscaling but if you could find a way to allow ffdShow to be used for all non essential content, eg less that a certain resolution yet remove the Post-processing on more GPU intensive stuff (any thing over a certain resolution 1280 x 720) that would be excellent...

I love ffdShow spline upscaling and sharpening on my DVD's

Just small note - here is two pictures upcaled to 1680x1050 - source DVD, ATI 4550, done only using DXVA (unlocked SAF, not from MP):
upscale.png

upscale1.png
 

csapollo

Portal Pro
May 17, 2007
217
13
38
Sydney, Australia
Home Country
At the moment:
- I don't use Cyberlink codecs at all.
- MPC Video Decoder for H264.
- Gabest Decoder for MPEG2,
- AC3Filter for movies.
- MPC-MPA Audio Decoder for TV.

It took me a while to find the best mix for my content/hardware, throwing FFDshow into the mix might make things difficult.
 

manray

Portal Pro
December 5, 2008
56
19
Guys, i am thinking to integrate FFDshow in to SAF. The reasons are:
- more video format support (like MJPG, VPx, FLV, etc...)
- replace MPA by ffdshow audio decoder (possibly fix reported pass-thrugh problems)
- post processing +video resize for all non DXVA material

No DXVA will be lost, all prewious functions will be keept.
This combination should create ultimate audio/video solution...

Please vote in pool!

That would be truly brilliant.. I use ffdShow in combination with your SAF all ready. Quite frankly I'm willing to loose H/A for the upscaling of the DIVX collections and YOUTUBE upscaling but if you could find a way to allow ffdShow to be used for all non essential content, eg less that a certain resolution yet remove the Post-processing on more GPU intensive stuff (any thing over a certain resolution 1280 x 720) that would be excellent...

I love ffdShow spline upscaling and sharpening on my DVD's

Yeah, if it is possible to combine ffdshow and SAF using the ffdshow profiles, we can create specific profiles based on file extension, file type, codec type or other to use SAF (GPU/DXVA) or ffdshow (CPU).
Currently I use ffdshow profiles to post-processing some type of files and no post-processing at all for other type of files(.mkv).
 

wouter1971

MP Donator
  • Premium Supporter
  • November 19, 2008
    911
    143
    Purmerend, Holland
    Home Country
    Netherlands Netherlands
    I think some posters don't read.
    Hoborg says: No DXVA will be lost, all previous functions will be kept. So Cyberlink stays :) GOOD!
    I think what SAF is now is great, just adding ffdshow for extra codec formats would be a good thing too.
    What i use from MPA is just SPDIF output and normalizing, the things ffdshow can do also.
    Maybe there can be 2 SAF's in the beginning?

    Hoborg, please do what you think is right and we can test it and comment on it.
     

    edterbak

    Portal Pro
    March 4, 2008
    2,114
    1,176
    Home Country
    Netherlands Netherlands
    Hoborg,

    I saw your Poll.. Can you maybe specify what the positives/negatives might be? I have no clue


    [edit]
    My bad. I just saw the quote on this page:

    Hoborg

    Guys, i am thinking to integrate FFDshow in to SAF. The reasons are:
    - more video format support (like MJPG, VPx, FLV, etc...)
    - replace MPA by ffdshow audio decoder (possibly fix reported pass-thrugh problems)
    - post processing +video resize for all non DXVA material

    No DXVA will be lost, all prewious functions will be keept.
    This combination should create ultimate audio/video solution...
     

    thesystemera

    Portal Pro
    May 26, 2008
    810
    22
    42
    Auckland
    Home Country
    New Zealand New Zealand
    manray how do you do that, I'm familiar with profiles but just having ffdshow added to post processing in my videos disables any H/A even if nothing is being applied...
     

    FantaXP7

    Portal Pro
    February 3, 2009
    204
    1
    I've never seen ffdshow as a bad thing when I used it in the past. I am wondering though if you did use ffdshow and SAF would it register the codecs for other media center programs like windows media center and xbmc? Or is that something that is completely out of the way and retarded of me to assume? I'm sort of a noob at all this.

    Anyways, I'm all for ffdshow.
     

    hoborg

    Portal Pro
    June 13, 2008
    4,413
    1,644
    Nový Jičín
    Home Country
    Czech Republic Czech Republic
    I've never seen ffdshow as a bad thing when I used it in the past. I am wondering though if you did use ffdshow and SAF would it register the codecs for other media center programs like windows media center and xbmc? Or is that something that is completely out of the way and retarded of me to assume? I'm sort of a noob at all this.

    Anyways, I'm all for ffdshow.

    XBMC is OpenGL based and use its own integrated decoders based on FFMPEG.

    Well, i just playing with FFDshow intergation and i found some interesting things...
    Firstly good news - intergation seems to be preaty easy, all is working just fine :)

    Then the worser:
    - there is something realy bad on latest MP 1.1 alpha SVN and VMR9, in lots of video examples i only got pixels, audio plays fine, graph is correct. The same video works in GB-PVR and MPC-HC with same decoders=must be MP problem. May be it have something to do with ATI cards, because lot of ATI users with older GPU have problems with new MP varsions, VMR9 renderer failed completly for them...
     

    kiwijunglist

    Super Moderator
  • Team MediaPortal
  • June 10, 2008
    6,746
    1,751
    New Zealand
    Home Country
    New Zealand New Zealand
    I'm using ATI HD4670 + XP + ATI9.7 (possibly 9.6) + MP1.1 Alpha + SVN from ~2 weeks ago + VMR9 + SAF unlocked. Played a lot of videos and no rendering problems.

    With regards to FFDShow Audio integration -> Yes for integration. I feel it would be better than MPA/Monogram AAC. For some reason I still require AC3Filter post processing otherwise i get some video frames jumping back/forth aka judder without ac3filter. It has the advantage of 5.1 AAC -> SPDIF being done correctly.

    FFDShow video = Maybe Integration, You could use it for select situations. Still should use MPCVideoDec/PDVD9H264 for any HD material (software decoding is too cpu intensive). Mpeg2 / DVD Video could probably be handled by FFDShow with optional upscaling profile set for certain conditions. A lot of people run a lean CPU because of hardware acceleration, so i think SAF should only switch to software decoding in situations that wont put too much cpu strain.

    - post processing +video resize for all non DXVA material

    You shouldn't use post processing / resize for non DXVA HD material, because the extra processing will make it too cpu intensive. SD fine, HD too cpu intensive?
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Top Bottom