Posts for RGamma


1 2
10 11 12 13
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Some more modern samples: The RE4 intro (the one you get when you press nothing at the main menu), some random Frogger gameplay sequence and the Frogger final boss. Used the same settings/procedure as Ilari.
$ du --all --bytes
5019961	./re4-intro-0.flac
2995162	./re4-intro-32.flac
4148250	./re4-intro-40.flac
4586172	./re4-intro-48.flac
4676520	./re4-intro-56.flac
4706506	./re4-intro-64.flac
4758964	./re4-intro-72.flac
4786232	./re4-intro-80.flac
4834316	./re4-intro-88.flac
4840875	./re4-intro-96.flac
4846302	./re4-intro-104.flac
4919028	./re4-intro-112.flac
4931645	./re4-intro-120.flac
4942491	./re4-intro-128.flac

$ du --all --bytes
1592745	./chase-0.flac
1006948	./chase-32.flac
1349540	./chase-40.flac
1510151	./chase-48.flac
1514319	./chase-56.flac
1520681	./chase-64.flac
1533906	./chase-72.flac
1543603	./chase-80.flac
1555798	./chase-88.flac
1557395	./chase-96.flac
1559373	./chase-104.flac
1572408	./chase-112.flac
1573878	./chase-120.flac
1574858	./chase-128.flac

$ du --all --bytes
6990114	./finalboss-0.flac
4090147	./finalboss-32.flac
5817116	./finalboss-40.flac
6536888	./finalboss-48.flac
6551756	./finalboss-56.flac
6552239	./finalboss-64.flac
6597581	./finalboss-72.flac
6631870	./finalboss-80.flac
6685404	./finalboss-88.flac
6717860	./finalboss-96.flac
6742955	./finalboss-104.flac
6824470	./finalboss-112.flac
6845393	./finalboss-120.flac
6866841	./finalboss-128.flac

$ opusenc --version
opusenc opus-tools 0.1.6-50-g1ba6702 (using libopus 1.1-beta-13-g0aa8b42)
Copyright (C) 2008-2013 Xiph.Org Foundation
Download re4-intro.tar.gz: https://mega.co.nz/#!plgDnTgY!Fey-vz5ooc0YKvw20VfUKhLrncph5FAhGHp8S5KreE8 Download chase.tar.gz: https://mega.co.nz/#!w9QSHL7b!aQesgTTqvCYx52A9LCYyvRpdszcU_VWpPrdLTQJlxe8 Download finalboss.tar.gz: https://mega.co.nz/#!JowT2JxA!SgWkDQjOY_dG_m6bXUZVX0BRQEc_c9XHBhbBzD8Viv4
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
CoolKirby wrote:
Thanks, Spikestuff. :) I actually took your suggestion of having an audioless encode a little further, throwing together an encode that starts with the sound on track but slowly gets very much desynced (I would have synced it up myself in Movie Maker, but it would take a little while and I really need to get to sleep). If anyone's interested, this major-audio-desync encode will be available in about 2 hours.
The desync you were experiencing is likely not easily fixed in an NLE (especially when audio is progressively (and irregularly so) desyncing and not just offset). Did you follow Thread #14192: Dolphin encoding guide?
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Quick-encode (syncs on FCEUX 2.2.1): Link to video
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Have you at least tried whether this game can be reliably played in an emulator? That's always a good thing to know.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Quick-encode: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFhxDraR9L0 Edit: Removed due to request of author.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Err and where exactly is his "good point"? All I see is him missing the point constantly (not going to really elaborate on that; (tool-assisted speedruns are not about showing off good reflexes and motoric skills, they're not competing with non-assisted runs and so on and so forth))
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Link to video Now I'm in the mood: Link to video Related videos in airloaf's channel.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Quick-encode: Link to video
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Patashu wrote:
[...] Mr. Sum: "I, too, know neither of both numbers; but I knew that you wouldn't know them." So Mr. Sum's sum cannot be broken down in any way that has only one factorization. Let's consider C. 8 and 11 add to 19. This can be broken down into: 2 and 17, product 34, only factorizable as 2*17 So in the world of C, Mr. Sum cannot claim this. [...]
Somehow I'm no convinced by how you exclude answer C: 8 and 11. Mr. Sum knows: 19 Mr. Product knows: 88 Since there are three valid factorizations of 88 (2*44, 4*22, 8*11), Mr. Product's first claim is correct. Mr. Sum can think of the following representations of 19: 2+17 (34) 3+16 (48) 4+15 (60) 5+14 (70) 6+13 (78) 7+12 (84) 8+11 (88) 9+10 (90) While it is true, that 34 has only one factorization (2*17), like you wrote, 48 and others have multiple. Mr. Sum however cannot be sure which of the above sums comprises his number 19, so if it was 3 and 16, then Mr. Product's product would be 48 which means that his first claim is still true (48 has more than one factorization). Edit: Ugh. Scratch all of the above. This is about Mr. Sum knowing for sure Mr. Product could never guess the factors of his product, which isn't true as long as there's a single pair of summands for Mr. Sum's number, whose factorization of their product reveals there's only one possible combination.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
I came across an aptitude test for would-be computer science students and found an interesting question (which I could not solve at the time of writing): Task L2 Time: 20 minutes Find two natural numbers in ]1;100[. Two persons, "Mr. Product", who knows the product of both numbers, and "Mr. Sum", who knows their sum, are having a talk: Mr. Product: "I know neither of both numbers." Mr. Sum: "I, too, know neither of both numbers; but I knew that you wouldn't know them." Mr. Product: "Now I know both numbers." Mr. Sum: "Now I know both numbers as well." What two numbers are they talking about (only one answer is correct)? A. 3 and 5 B. 2 and 7 C. 8 and 11 D. 4 and 13 Solution: Answer D is correct. Source: English translation of Task L2 from http://www.pms.ifi.lmu.de/eignungstest/ Edit: Answer A is easily ruled out. Assume the correct answer was A then Mr. Product would know "15" and Mr. Sum "8". Now for Mr. Sum there are 2 valid combinations of how to get to "8" by summing two natural numbers: 2+6 and 3+5 (1+7 and 4+4 are invalid). The products of these are 2*6=12 and 3*5=15. Mr. Product on the other hand knows 15, that can solely be written as 3*5. Mr. Product would hear Mr. Sum claim that he could not possibly know the numbers of which "15" is composed of, which is not true, since there is only one combination. Edit 2: Mhh, the same is true for answer B. How can Mr. Sum be sure that Mr. Product wouldn't know the numbers only by having their sum and how can Mr. Product deduce from that what both numbers are? I am probably over-thinking this.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Quick-encode: Link to video
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
ColdStardust wrote:
It's Australia smart one!
Actually not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fucking,_Austria There's also a beer available from that region ("hell" is the German adjecive for "bright" or "pale"): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fucking_Hell
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
In the encode.avs look for the line (probably l.39): "factor = hd ? (nds ? 4 : 8) : 1". Comment it for the time being and add the line "factor = 2" below. x264 is trying to encode a huge resolution video (1280*8x720*8 = 10240x5760, assuming the HD flag is set to true).
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
What are the contents of youtube.bat (aka what is the commandline)? What file are you trying to encode (resolution)? What version of x264 are you using and what architecture was it built for? What is the architecture of your operating system? How much RAM does your computer have?
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Very high quality encode (595MB, upper screen only): H.264 10bit444 CRF 0, FLAC lossless audio https://mega.co.nz/#!Nhwi3BqB!EqEOMiD8Fa8_9fAXV4q3Pig1_1Z3W6nlbSadpUh-KNA
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Requesting quick encode.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Encoding After following the procedure described in the Dolphin video dumping guide it will have created several files in the dump directory of your Dolphin folder. This guide aims to provide you with information on how these files should be handled for encoding and differentiates between Windows and Linux versions of the AVhack. General Audio should be encoded at the sampling rate that requires the least amount of audio to be resampled. This should be 32kHz. An exception is encoding to Opus, whose encoder automatically resamples to 48kHz (this might change in the future). In that case it is advisable to resample audio manually using a high quality resampler like the one sox provides. TODO: Add/explain formula for calculating the accurate FPS (it is here: http://codepad.org/HKorMEoH for now) Windows First take a look at \User\Dump\Audio. Out of the four files it contains (audiodump.wav, dspdump0-2.wav) only the latter three are needed. dspdump0.wav and dspdump2.wav are both 32kHz whereas dspdump1.wav is 48kHz. Resample that file to 32kHz and concatenate them subsequently:
sox dspdump0.wav dspdump1.wav dspdump2.wav <outfile_concat>
outfile_concat now contains a proper audiodump of the movie. It is also possible to concatenate them on the fly with Avisynth. (TODO: Add the code snippet for this.) Afterwards examine \User\Dump\Frames. It contains two files: framedump0.avi and timecodes.txt. framedump0.avi holds the lossless video dump as VFR (variable framerate) video and timecodes.txt the associated timecodes in v2 format. Assuming you are using Avisynth for processing the video before inputting it to an encoding frontend, you now have to apply the timecodes to the video file and mux the resulting clip with the audio. To following code snippet is to be prepended to the respective .avs:
LoadCPlugin("timecodefps.dll")
video = AVISource("videofile.avi").TimecodeFPS("timecodes.txt", fpsnum=X, fpsden=Y)
audio = WAVSource("audiofile.wav")
AudioDub(video,audio)
Info: Above code requires natt's VFR-to-CFR-conversion plugin; alternatively you may use Aktan's plugin, which tolerates missing or spare timecodes. X and Y denote the desired CFR video FPS, TODO: Explain Pipedec usage Linux Every file you need resides in $HOME/.dolphin-emu/Dump/Frames: framedump0.avi (lossless VFR video encoded with FFV1), framedump.txt (v2 timecodes), framedump0.raw and framedump1.raw (both audio). Audio is stored to disk as 16-bit, 2-channel, 32kHz, big endian raw audio (corresponds to ffmpeg format "s16be"). You likely want to convert it into something more suitable using e.g. ffmpeg:
ffmpeg -f s16be -channels 2 -ar 32000 -i framedump0.raw -c:a pcm_s16le audio.wav
Edit: This post is under construction. The dumping guide has been moved to the wiki: http://tasvideos.org/EncodingGuide/VideoDumping.html#Dolphin. The encoding guide will soon be corrected and differentiate between Windows and Linux versions of the AVhack.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Very high quality encode (67MB): H.264 10bit444 CRF 0, FLAC lossless audio https://mega.co.nz/#!JshyDJaa!FUtdbUa2m5bsVbZhpMxu6SRaDpsgOkUL-yu6uKpga2s
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Have you had a look at http://tasvideos.org/TASTutorial.html? Might not be exactly what you're looking for; it may be a good starting point nonetheless.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Quick-encoding this...not.
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 2/3/2013
Posts: 320
Location: Germany
Very high quality encode (169MB): H.264 10bit444 CRF 0, FLAC lossless audio https://mega.co.nz/#!k5BwFDLa!LdpqGHm0ceQ8lKOZ6LL2RCmq92Iu5Hc0fuyZ2dL9EYo
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
1 2
10 11 12 13