Processing + muxing of MPEG2 elementary video stream

[poutnik]

There is a limit to missing flawed dvb stream information you can recover/fix. If the signal breaks up that is it. Mostly when the green blocks appear the content is to far gone.

Yes, it is obvious there is limit, as for any data format. 
But usually the damaged part can be skipped at worst.
As where ADM cannot continue, PX usually can.
I say usually, but cases when PX gives up are very rare,compared to ADM.

IMHO ADM gives up too soon.

[zakk]

Yes, and in my experience Some ADM releases give up soon er than others !! That's why I stopped using latest builds (now using r8195).

[Jan Gruuthuse]

We are back at the old road again: complaining about avidemux: I'm not interested.
It works fine for me. If there are issues, I pass it on to the developers. That's it.

[poutnik]

We are back at the old road again: complaining about avidemux: I'm not interested.
It works fine for me. If there are issues, I pass it on to the developers. That's it.

I apologize, it was not intended to be a complains, but topic for improvement.
You passed it and thats it.

Bad software would not be worthy to bother with.
If there is something I think could be better in good product,
should I be silent to prevent improvement ?

[poutnik]

For now, I have created a windows batch file that
        preventively fixes TS by ProjectX
        indexes fixed TS by CLI launched ADM QT4.

So I start ADM GUI session with preventively fixed and indexed TS.

As in case of a problem with occational nonrecoverable data error in original TS,
they often do not occur early in indexing phase, but in the middle of X264 encoding, making the effort wasted.

Early caution is better than late sorry.

[poutnik]

We are back at the old road again: complaining about avidemux: I'm not interested.
It works fine for me. If there are issues, I pass it on to the developers. That's it.

Unless there are improvement suggestions from users or coders/authors themselves, there is no development, as all are satisfied.

But  I agree the form they are presented is very important.
The same thing may lead to both being implemented or rejected, depending on how it is communicated.

[AQUAR]

@ poutnik

The "back on the old road" issue is not so much about You raising and discussing issues with ADM.
But more to do with some individuals that always jump in to try and agitate these discussions about ADM issues (maybe unintended!).

IMHO these individuals should do better by being constructive in the discussion.

ADM has its flaws, as has every video editor (none meets the "holy grail").
It is what it is, and improvements do come about by topics such as this.

[poutnik]

I see.
I like to discuss with you, and I hope my suggestions may lead sometime to be considered.

If ADM developers do not consider to improve error recovery of ADM - what I can understand,
they may consider integration of ProjectX ( as java application it is mutiplatform ) as external tool for optional data preprocessing.

Or as a fallback step if direct processing of MPEG2 PS/TS by ADM fails.

One can do it manually by launching linux scripts or Windoes batch files, but done directly from ADM GUI would be great.

[AQUAR]

@ poutnik
I too am just an enduser and so, of course, I cannot speak for ADM developers as to how they will shape the future of ADM.
But ADM being open source means that feature enhancements can be made by anyone with the needed skill sets.

As a recent example, X265 was added by KoolAidMan with the support of the ADM Author.
That example also was by way of some members here suggesting it woud be nice to have that feature.

On top of that, the Author (primary developer) of ADM is a very frequent visitor here.
Meaning all suggestions and issues are actually being read and therefore at least get an in passing consideration.

I have exercised the freedom to speak my meaning about ADM and its not all about glory either.
My personal opinion (not sanctioned by the ADM people!)(and obviously opposed by some!):
Like some endusers that frequently respond here, I hate it when users push beyond the discussion/wishing/reporting boundary.
Hate it because no enduser has self entitlements to make fix it demand's that involves the skill's and time of others.
Especially so, if those that make "demanding suggestions" have no concept of what is involved.
And I get peeved even more by those members that try to steer the discussion into a kind of "lets complain about ADM" nonsense.

I remember some time ago and enduser wanting a full diagnostic report generated on every ADM crash!
Tried to explain how unreasonable that type of "request" is (wasted effort that was!).

Anyway, I enjoyed this thread.

[poutnik]

Well, my last real coding was CP/M M80 Assembler used for Z80 CPU , some CP/M Pascal and C, and Turbo Pascal for DOS. Since then, I do usually just only some simple batches, very simple Linux scripts, simple VBS or javascipt and some not so simple MS Excel VBA coding.

I hope my suggestions do not cross demanding level, and if felt like that, it was not my intension. I am just struggling to understand sometimes, why are some particular things implemented by their way.

Like ADM not expecting the user may want the original video MyGreatVideoRecord.TS  to be saved as ( or derived) "MyGreatVideoRecord" filename, with "MKV" extension if he has chosen MKV container.

[Jan Gruuthuse]

some additional info:
SD transmissions in mpeg-ts, dvb-s2 are not handled very well in avidemux 2.5.6.

[poutnik]

Yes, I remember seeing that.  Thank you for mentioning it.
I do not process HD H264 based TSs, just SD MPEG2 TS.

[Jan Gruuthuse]

No No: not HD H264 based TS, now SD H264 based

[poutnik]

Hm, I did not know SD context is broadcasrt as H264 as well.
Our providers use it for HD only.

In fact, I am not fully sure if all DTV sets are able to process H264...

[Jan Gruuthuse]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB-T2