Topic: Give us the option to choose ROHQ hardware acceleration method (e.g., QuickSync) (Read 7919 times)

jkauff · « **on:** July 21, 2016, 06:38:34 pm »

Since I can't access LAV settings in ROHQ, I don't know what "Hardware accelerate video decoding" does. I assume it's using DXVA2 Copy-back, but I have QuickSync available and want to use it in LAV as I do with other players.

It would be nice to be able to do this simple thing without installing LAV in Custom. Now that we can access madVR settings in ROHQ, isn't it time to allow changes to some basic LAV functionality?

JimH · « **Reply #1 on:** July 21, 2016, 11:54:01 pm »

If you want custom settings, you will need to use the custom option.

The reason is that our current system works reliably, is easy to support, and advanced users can still do anything they want.

jkauff · « **Reply #2 on:** July 23, 2016, 04:55:11 pm »

Quote from: JimH on July 21, 2016, 11:54:01 pm

The reason is that our current system works reliably, is easy to support, and advanced users can still do anything they want.

Fair enough, although the link to madVR settings seems to break that model. Is it asking too much to have a similar link (with similar warning) for LAV settings?

RD James · « **Reply #3 on:** July 23, 2016, 08:24:03 pm »

If you have enough knowledge that you're wanting to change this, it's easier to just install LAV Filters on the system and set it up as a custom mode.
That also lets you easily toggle between ROHQ (internal LAV decoder) and your custom mode. (exernal decoder)

The "Hardware accelerate video decoding" option picks the best method for the hardware that you're using.
For NVIDIA that is DXVA2 Copy-Back. I forget what that is for AMD/Intel.

jkauff · « **Reply #4 on:** July 23, 2016, 10:50:14 pm »

I do exactly that, set it up as custom. I just don't understand why I'm forced to use another copy of LAV when it's right there in the MC22 Plugins folder.

Why are the madVR settings accessible from the MC22 Options menu, but not LAV? madVR is way more complex for the average user to configure than LAV. The inconsistency bothers me.

I've been paid to design easy-to-use user interfaces for 25 years, and if it had been my call I would have put the madVR settings link in the Custom dialog. But since it's on the Video menu, why not LAV as well? In any case, they should both be in the same place.

JimH · « **Reply #5 on:** July 24, 2016, 01:01:12 am »

Quote from: jkauff on July 23, 2016, 10:50:14 pm

I do exactly that, set it up as custom. I just don't understand why I'm forced to use another copy of LAV when it's right there in the MC22 Plugins folder.

Because we have a greater chance of success with this degree of control. This has worked very well for several years now, so don't expect a change.

I don't know where you're seeing madVR settings in MC.

In any case, if you're an advanced user, feel free to use custom settings, but don't ask for help with that here. If it seems confusing use RO HQ or STD.

jkauff · « **Reply #6 on:** July 24, 2016, 05:08:37 am »

Quote from: JimH on July 24, 2016, 01:01:12 am

I don't know where you're seeing madVR settings in MC.

Are you serious? It's the first sub-item in Video Mode when you select ROHQ. Looks like this:

...Open madVR Settings (Advanced)...

This was added in MC21 and carried over into MC22.

However, I'll give up now. I can do everything I want to do in the way of advanced settings, I just don't like HOW I have to do it. The Options UI looks like it was designed by a developer, which it probably was. A UX professional would know how to do it better.

mwillems · « **Reply #7 on:** July 24, 2016, 10:24:58 am »

Quote from: jkauff on July 24, 2016, 05:08:37 am

Are you serious? It's the first sub-item in Video Mode when you select ROHQ. Looks like this:

...Open madVR Settings (Advanced)...

This was added in MC21 and carried over into MC22.

However, I'll give up now. I can do everything I want to do in the way of advanced settings, I just don't like HOW I have to do it. The Options UI looks like it was designed by a developer, which it probably was. A UX professional would know how to do it better.

I'm not a dev, but my recollection is that the reason that the MadVR settings are exposed there are because MadVR (which is separately developed) always exposes it's settings in the tray icon as part of running. However, by default, that tray icon only appears during playback, which meant that tweaking MadVR settings required starting a video, minimizing the video, and then editing the settings.

The menu item in JRiver was added by user request as a convenience because the settings were already irrevocably exposed, just in an inconvenient place. The JRiver devs generally trend towards reducing the visibility of these kinds of settings, so I was quite grateful when the easy menu item was introduced. I'm not sure suggesting the devs don't understand UI is going to bring them around to your way of thinking.

JimH · « **Reply #8 on:** July 24, 2016, 10:46:45 am »

Your UX comments smack of self-puffery. I'm sorry we lost your number.

thecrow · « **Reply #9 on:** July 24, 2016, 10:55:41 am »

I have to agree with the OP.
The JRiver user interface is rather inconsistent and a bit of a mess.

JimH · « **Reply #10 on:** July 24, 2016, 11:01:14 am »

Quote from: thecrow on July 24, 2016, 10:55:41 am

I have to agree with the OP.
The JRiver user interface is rather inconsistent and a bit of a mess.

We're always interested in suggestions.

We don't always follow them since moving things around in the user interface can make existing customers irritable.

thecrow · « **Reply #11 on:** July 24, 2016, 11:19:15 am »

Here's a suggestion:

Tools>Options>Audio>Advanced> "Write tool name and version"

I assume this refers to adding a tag to music files that contains the JRiver Media Center Version used to tag it.
It seems an odd place to put this option to me, maybe move it to General>Importing and Tagging.
And maybe move Importing and Tagging from General to Library and Folders?

Hendrik · « **Reply #12 on:** July 24, 2016, 11:21:09 am »

LAV is configured fully programmatically by MC for different usage scenarios, which is why settings are not accessible - they wouldn't save either way.

madVR is not, we only provide an initial set of configuration and have always let the user customize this, it was just not very easy to access before the new option was introduced.

On top of all that, both QuickSync and CUVID are deprecated with known issues and limitations, which is why I would not recommend anyone to use it, and on that alone I wouldnt directly expose an option for those.

The Red October playback is otherwise fully configurable, and you can make it use any settings you want, but we'll not expose all of them, or even any that we don't deem necessary to be changeable and instead will keep recommending a custom filter setup if you require special settings.

jkauff · « **Reply #13 on:** July 24, 2016, 05:35:46 pm »

Hendrik, I'd forgotten you're deprecating QS in LAV. My rig can handle software decoding easily, but I won't use DXVA2 because I need all my GPU power for madVR.

QS works fine for me, but I guess I'll go back to software until Windows finally supports using the iGPU and dGPU at the same time.

Thanks for your comments.

jkauff · « **Reply #14 on:** July 24, 2016, 05:51:33 pm »

Quote from: JimH on July 24, 2016, 10:46:45 am

Your UX comments smack of self-puffery. I'm sorry we lost your number.

That was rude and unnecessary, and sounds very defensive. If you have UX professionals on staff at JRiver, the blame goes on them, not the developers.

If you don't, I've always said that the very thing that makes a good developer--understanding the program inside and out--makes it almost impossible for them to see the UI through the eyes of a new or even an average user. That's one reason why UX exists as a discipline, and why there's never been a shortage of work for UX professionals.

JimH · « **Reply #15 on:** July 25, 2016, 01:02:59 am »

I would be happy to hear any specific suggestions you have, but to dismiss the user interface and its design is slightly arrogant, in my opinion.

We have not used any devoted UX person, except in a couple of cases where we did large contract jobs for Best Buy, MTV, and others. I did not see an improvement from doing so.

The UI has evolved over the years, and represents both the development team's ideas and those of our customers. It greatly benefits from the continuous feedback we receive here. When we do something stupid, our customers let us know immediately and we change it.

JRiver Media Center is one of a handful of leading digital media solutions. It's been in continuous development for almost two decades. Its sales support a team of more than 10 people, and it has outlasted many deep pocket competitors.

So if you think you can do a better job, start a thread and make specific proposals. If they are good, we may make some changes. If nothing else, you will get a chance to demonstrate your superior abilities.

BillT · « **Reply #16 on:** July 25, 2016, 01:55:14 am »

Quote from: jkauff on July 24, 2016, 05:51:33 pm

That was rude and unnecessary, and sounds very defensive.

It always amazes me how patient and restrained Jim is in his replies to some of the posts on this forum. There are multitudes of posts whinging that the UI is not as good as program X,Y,Z and you must change it so that it suits me. Yet another one, which is not actually talking about the UI at all, but some arcane hardware customisation buried deep in the bowels of the program, isn't likely to go down well.

Incidentally, all those professional UI programmers seem to be pretty bad at their job; most UIs are indifferent to down right bad. And they keep changing them, usually to make them worse.

JimH · « **Reply #17 on:** July 25, 2016, 03:00:57 am »

Thanks, Bill.

jkauff · « **Reply #18 on:** July 25, 2016, 10:41:54 am »

Quote from: JimH on July 25, 2016, 01:02:59 am

I would be happy to hear any specific suggestions you have, but to dismiss the user interface and its design is slightly arrogant, in my opinion.

Please quote the post where I dismissed the user interface design. I noticed ONE inconsistency, and pointed it out. I won't make that mistake again.

I have absolutely no interest in doing an analysis of the MC UI, and certainly not for free.

JimH · « **Reply #19 on:** July 25, 2016, 03:39:08 pm »

No surprise.

I'd say this fits the "dismissive" description:

Quote from: jkauff on July 24, 2016, 05:08:37 am

The Options UI looks like it was designed by a developer, which it probably was. A UX professional would know how to do it better.

kstuart · « **Reply #20 on:** July 26, 2016, 07:06:39 pm »

Quote from: JimH on July 25, 2016, 03:39:08 pm

I'd say this fits the "dismissive" description:

I think his remark that you quoted can be taken as an objective statement, rather than "dismissive".

What he is describing is very parallel to having an automative engine designer, also design the interior of the car.

However, I think that he is incorrect. My perception is that the UI of MediaCenter was determined by the much more limited graphics resources available to a software program, back when "Media Jukebox" was created. The UI was the best that could be done at the time. Subsequently, new features were slowly added on top.

At various points, a better UI could have been created, but only by junking the whole thing and starting over, which would be possible for a company like MS, but not for a group comprising a total of 10.

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: Give us the option to choose ROHQ hardware acceleration method (e.g., QuickSync) (Read 7919 times)