avidemux configured to use hardware decoder, but falls back to lavcodec silently

[zhangweiwu]

Is this a bug? Reproduce:
0) configure avidemux to use libva for decoding and XVideo for video playback.
1) open http://www.realss.com/IMG_0409.MOV with avidemux 2.8.6 ( /usr/bin/avidemux3_qt4 )
3) you see on the upper-left corner the decoder at work is lavcodec.

Expected:
3) you see on the upper-left corner the decoder at work is libva.

Environment:

Code Select Expand


> uname -a
Linux pocahontas.lan 3.11.10-7-desktop #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Feb 3 09:41:24 UTC 2014 (750023e) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> cat /etc/issue
Welcome to openSUSE 13.1 "Bottle" - Kernel \r (\l).
> /sbin/lspci | grep VGA
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 4 Series Chipset Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 07)


Console output after a full playback is attached to this post. Weired enough, the word 'libva' is not mentioned in the log file at all, not even a message indicating it failed to start. Shouldn't there be at least a passing mentioning of libva?

I also attached my ~/.avidemux6/config2 - beside that, I rechecked 3 times that I did chose and only chose libva in "HW Accel" tab of "perferences" and that I have "libva" checked in "Help->Build Option".

[mean]

Did you build avidemux yourself ?

[zhangweiwu]

I used the build shared on opensuse's build service, built by Christoph Stoppe (German):

https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:happenpappen/avidemux

Should I distrust the "Help->Build Option" output and build it myself?

Thanks.

[mean]

It might be a good idea to build it yourself

[zhangweiwu]

Thanks but, as the truth be so told, the opensource community doesn't help those who don't want to help themselves. I think I am to the point I no longer wish to help myself hence no longer deserve help: too much time has been spent investigating, reading wikipedia, googling and decrypting UI messages and the lack of UI messages, learning specification and library nuances ... that I neglected other duties to the point that I was asked why don't I buy a Mac and get on with living. Really appreciate the unpaid time you contributed posting on my thread and good to know you avidemux folks. I guess it must be really difficult to get video cut-paste software work at consumer product quality since so many other opensource attempts started and fell into oblivion (I tried many in the last decade, I would not say they work better than avidemux).

To a programmer I gave up too easily, but 5 hours is the time a none-programmer can spend at max to tweak a software before being able to edit the home video. (Computer is not too slow I guess, since 2 of the 5 hours spent on tweaking on AMD Phenom II X4 945 CPU that runs BattleField 4 fine)

[zhangweiwu]

Did you guys ever consider this? Instead of fixing performance problems, if it is proven too tricky to fix for many users, why not offer user to edit a video in the reduced resolution (1/4 the size cached) or recompressed (decode it and re-encode it into MJPEG) or half-decoded (like half-decoded JPEG, that appears blur) instead, and re-apply the changes on the original media upon saving? This, however only make sense if there are a lot users who suffer from performance issue - which seems to be true by glancing over the posts in the past.

[Jan Gruuthuse]

You still add extra decoding on top, in my opinion.
Reduce size of displayed video in avidemux. After video is loaded press 3 or 4. See if that helps to move around in video?
I have noticed same kind of behavior on none nvidia display. (intel core i5-2500k) with your mov.
If you have the choice on your (photo) camera select for recording mp4 container instead of the used .mov. Perhaps this improves editing?

[AQUAR]

Just adding my 2 cents worth!
Performance is very much relative to an individuals perception.
Hence you get quite broad opinions about performance type issues.
Even to the point that some members think Avidemux should have deep diagnostics to give comprehensive error dialogs on every conceivable problem.

I run the windows based version, so there is no hardware decoding option.
Despite that I think the decoding performance is fine (of course purely IMHO).

[Jan Gruuthuse]

if you have OpenGL working, you should see improvement on editing.

[AQUAR]

I always think of OpenGL as a language for hardware accelerated rendering of vector graphics.
I don't notice much difference with or without on my machines.
It might help a bit with editing functions but I don't think it will help with decoding or encoding.

Of course, not sure about my interpretation at all.

[Jan Gruuthuse]

Frame buffering is done faster, i think. Moving forward/backward  thru video is faster then using standard video output like x11 output. In avidemux with opengl enabled you have additional filters to process video see attached picture. Link to video is sample created with OpenGL Rotate in avidemux. Good way to check if avidemux is using available OpenGL or not. Possibly not available when running Ubuntu on virtual box.
OpenGL Fragment Shader Sample 13.2 MB

[AQUAR]

Thanks Jan, they are interesting OpenGL filters.

It seems that OpenGL is only an available option on the windows 64 bit version.
Even then, these filters are not build/included.
Thats a pity for the windows folks.

[mean]

With some drivers (intel) it crashes hard very early

[AQUAR]

Does it work with some drivers?

On my old PC:
Drivers for the graphics card are ATI derived.
Graphics card is on PCI Express (P965 chipset) - microsoft driver.

Wouldn't mind trying if you ever so inclined to build these filters for the windows platform.