antiX-21-beta2 iso files available.

[Member Xecure]

Helpful

Up

0

::

marcelocripe wrote:

Celluloid played with better quality than MPV

Celluloid is just a “skin” of MPV, so the quality should be the same. I don’t think there is much lost because the default is mpv instead of celluloid

https://celluloid-player.github.io/
Celluloid (formerly GNOME MPV) is a simple GTK+ frontend for mpv. It aims to be easy to use while maintaining high level of configurability.

antiX Live system enthusiast.
General Live Boot Parameters for antiX.

[Member ModdIt]

Helpful

Up

0

::

What Marcello is seeing may be a result of Celluloid manipulating MPV settings.
Optimizing quality is very hardware dependant. It might be better to check if
the settings from celluloid do differ from mpv as delivered by antiX, if they
work better on older hardware put a profile here in forum.

Or to do a web search and try out some of the suggestions found.
I found https://freetime.mikeconnelly.com/archives/5371 quite helpful.
this too https://kokomins.wordpress.com/2019/10/14/mpv-config-guide/
and https://www.ghacks.net/2019/07/27/how-to-customize-the-settings-in-mpv/

Needed to get best screen quality from a Victure helmet camera, later one
from crosstour. Both needed differnt profiles.

[Member Xecure]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Current code change runs this command:
mpv --window-scale=0.5 "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwuTtjF6zS0"
And this is what you would see with celluloid:
celluloid "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwuTtjF6zS0"

I see the exact same audio and video quality on my system, and the biggest difference is that the mpv video starts up smaller, which is much better than what celluloid does in my screen.
Also, mpv will probably NOT be removed in any systems, as a lot of apps depend on it. Celluloid, on the other hand, isn’t a dependency of any installed app, so it could be removed from most systems.

I still prefer anticapitalista’s decision of using mpv.

antiX Live system enthusiast.
General Live Boot Parameters for antiX.

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Xecure wrote:

Current code change runs this command:
mpv --window-scale=0.5 "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwuTtjF6zS0"
And this is what you would see with celluloid:
celluloid "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwuTtjF6zS0"

I see the exact same audio and video quality on my system, and the biggest difference is that the mpv video starts up smaller, which is much better than what celluloid does in my screen.
Also, mpv will probably NOT be removed in any systems, as a lot of apps depend on it. Celluloid, on the other hand, isn’t a dependency of any installed app, so it could be removed from most systems.

I still prefer anticapitalista’s decision of using mpv.

I also support what we include in our system. People who need or prefer other tools are free to modify, add, or alter whatever they want. Of course, they are also completely responsible for whatever changes are made.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member ModdIt]

Helpful

Up

0

::

To be very clear, I did not suggest to change to celluloid, I would in any case reinstall MPV.

The launch command does not make the changes to /home/your_user/.config/mpv where present, that is the
place I put a user config.

On a lot of hardware monitor combinations differences are hard to see, with a good high resolution
(mine is roughly colour calibrated) monitor and graphics card most changes to config are visible.

On my EEPC they are worthless due hardware constraints.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by ModdIt.

[Anonymous]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hmm, isn’t youtube-dl similarly “just a front-end for mpv (or for mplayer)” ?
Its package installs 5MB files (plus dependencies?), but it provides worthy extra amenities.

For many potential users, the gui playback controls within celluloid would be a welcome amenity… and its package installs only 1MB additional files (and no additional dependent packages).

What’s the runtime memory footprint of celluloid, compared to that of mpv? If the difference is significant, can leave mpv as the lean-n-mean default handler but celluloid would still be accessible via OpenWith or via desktop menu.

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Anonymous wrote:

What’s the runtime memory footprint of celluloid, compared to that of mpv? If the difference is significant, can leave mpv as the lean-n-mean default handler but celluloid would still be accessible via OpenWith or via desktop menu.

That is how it is set up on antiX. It has been like that since antiX-19, possibly earlier.

Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member ModdIt]

Helpful

Up

0

::

That is how it is set up on antiX. It has been like that since antiX-19, possibly earlier.

Thanks for info, Had to laugh, celluloid was not shown in my menus, never even noticed it
was already installed. antiX more than swiss army knife.

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Maybe it’s because I use rox filer all the time even under herbstluftwm.
Right click on the file is your friend.

Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member marcelocripe]

Helpful

Up

0

::

What’s the runtime memory footprint of celluloid, compared to that of mpv? If the difference is significant, can leave mpv as the lean-n-mean default handler but celluloid would still be accessible via OpenWith or via desktop menu.

Skiddo, unfortunately I don’t have memory footprint data, but what I can say that the tests I did were visual. I will explain in more detail. The computers had processors (32-bit Pentium 4 or Celeron) with only one core and 1 GB DDR RAM. Using SMTube, I chose a YouTube video of about 30 min, first I ran the video with MPV and visually I could see that some frames were lagging behind the voice, there were some flaws and distortions in the images. Then I repeated the same process, but this time with Celluloid and visually the quality was higher in everything, there was almost no delay of images in relation to audio. To be even more sure, I restarted the computer, retried the tests starting another video with about 30 minutes in Terminal, first starting with Celluloid and then starting the same video with MPV. In this second test I could confirm that somehow Celluloid could play an online video much better than MPV in computers with limited resources. The tests took place on different days, were on different computers on different internet connection. The tests were done in different conditions and in all of them Celluloid got the best. I can’t say why Celluloid was superior, if as Xecure wrote he “Celluloid is just a “skin” of MPV”.

The commands in the Terminal were similar to these:

$ celluloid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwuTtjF6zS0&t=696s

or

$ mpv https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwuTtjF6zS0&t=696s

– – – – –

Skiddo, infelizmente eu não possuo dados de pegada de memória, mas o que eu posso dizer que os testes que eu fiz foram visuais. Eu vou explicar com mais detalhes. Os computadores possuíam processadores (Pentium 4 ou Celeron de 32 bits) com apenas um núcleo e memória RAM de 1 GB DDR. Através do SMTube, eu escolhi um vídeo do YouTube de cerca de 30 min, primeiro executei o vídeo com o MPV e visualmente pude perceber que alguns quadros ficavam atrasados com relação a voz, ocorriam algumas falhas e distorções nas imagens. Em seguida eu repeti o mesmo processo, mas desta vez com o Celluloid e visualmente a qualidade foi maior em tudo, quase não havia atraso das imagens em relação ao áudio. Para ter ainda mais certeza, eu reiniciei o computador, refiz os testes iniciando um outro vídeo com cerca de 30 min no Terminal, primeiro iniciando com o Celluloid e depois iniciando o mesmo vídeo com o MPV. Neste segundo teste eu pude confirmar que de alguma forma o Celluloid conseguia reproduzir um vídeo on-line muito melhor do que o MPV em computadores com recursos limitados. Os testes ocorreram dias diferentes, foram em computadores diferentes em conexão de internet diferentes. Os testes foram feitos em condições diferentes e em todas o Celluloid levou a melhor. Eu não sei dizer porque o Celluloid foi superior, se conforme o Xecure escreveu ele “celulóide é apenas uma “pele” do MPV”.

Os comandos no Terminal foram semelhantes a estes:

$ celluloid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwuTtjF6zS0&t=696s

ou

$ mpv https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwuTtjF6zS0&t=696s

[Member Robin]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hello Marcelo,

please repeat the test with video files stored locally. It might be possible, that the site (youtube) delivers different resolutions when accessed by the different user interfaces. Make sure you do not use more than 720p quality 32 bit machines. You can check the resolution of a download by using the command:
youtube-dl -F '<youtube-url'
Use the file identifiers in the beginning of each line from its output to compose your individual stream resolution:

Most time
youtube-dl -f '136+140' '<youtube-url'
or
youtube-dl -f '136+251' '<youtube-url'
will be fine for 32 bit machines. Higher resolutions will cause delay and scattered display. On weaker machines you probably want to choose a pair of even lower resolution. Btw, you can always use the best audio quality available, with any even low video resolution, this will not overstrain any PC.

There shouldn’t be any difference between mpv and celluloid while playing identical files/resolutions.

So long
Robin

Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.

[Member seaken64]

Helpful

Up

0

::

I haven’t seen anybody else mention any problems with using HTOP in a21b2. But when I open HTOP from a terminal the bottom line that shows the Function Key selections is not functioning properly. I have always had trouble using the F10 key to quit HTOP since it opens the menu of ROX Term. So I had got used to clicking on the F10 with my mouse. That does not work to quite HTOP and instead pops up a sort list. I end up using the X in the upper right to quit HTOP and the entire terminal.

This is on the 32-bit version. I have installed three or four copies today and it is the same behavior on all of the machines.

Seaken64

[Member olsztyn]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Indeed. This appears to be specific to Roxterm. Works correctly for me using RXVT and ST terminals.

Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

[Member marcelocripe]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Thank you so much Robin.

Your explanations could also be posted in the topic Watching Youtube in very old (even 32bits) pc’s (and in more recent ones too).

– – – – –

Muito obrigado Robin.

As suas explicações poderiam ser postadas também no tópico Watching Youtube in very old (even 32bits) pc’s (and in more recent ones too).

[Member calciumsodium]

Helpful

Up

0

::

32-bit live USB:

Regarding internet connectivity. I am able to connect to internet on many of my systems except for one system, an hp pavilion ze4900. Interesting, this hp pavilion ze4900 works great and gets great wifi connectivity with antix 19 installed.

With the 32-bit live USB, it recognizes that the wifi is powered on in connman, but does not see any wifi networks.
So, in Control center > Network > Select wifi application, I switch to Ceni, then switched back to connman. And only then do I see the wifi networks. I then connect to my wifi. It then connects, but I get very poor signal. Cannot even load antixforum.com.

Then I shut down and boot into my installed antiX 19. I get good wifi connectivity. Can surf the web with ease.

So I think it might be the 32-bit B2 system on this particular hp pavilion ze4900.

Here are the specs for my system:

jakersfan@jakersfan:~
$ inxi -Fxz
System:
  Host: jakersfan Kernel: 4.9.0-276-antix.1-486-smp i686 bits: 32 
  compiler: gcc v: 8.3.0 Desktop: IceWM 1.6.3+git20191202 
  Distro: antiX-19.1_386-full Marielle Franco 23 December 2019 
  base: Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster) 
Machine:
  Type: Laptop System: Hewlett-Packard 
  product: hp pavilion ze4900 (PR300UA#ABA) v: Rev 1 serial: <filter> 
  Mobo: Quanta model: 3084 v: 41.0B serial: <filter> BIOS: Hewlett-Packard 
  v: F.15 date: 11/09/2004 
Battery:
  ID-1: BAT0 charge: 0% condition: N/A/88.8 Wh model: Hewlett-Packard JM-6 
  status: Discharging 
CPU:
  Topology: Single Core model: Intel Celeron M bits: 32 type: MCP 
  arch: M Dothan rev: 6 L2 cache: 1024 KiB 
  flags: sse sse2 bogomips: 2593 
  Speed: 1297 MHz min/max: N/A Core speed (MHz): 1: 1297 
Graphics:
  Device-1: Intel 82852/855GM Integrated Graphics vendor: Hewlett-Packard 
  driver: i915 v: kernel bus ID: 00:02.0 
  Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.4 driver: intel 
  unloaded: fbdev,modesetting,vesa resolution: 1024x768~60Hz 
  OpenGL: renderer: Mesa DRI Intel 852GM/855GM x86/MMX/SSE2 
  v: 1.3 Mesa 18.3.6 direct render: Yes 
Audio:
  Device-1: Intel 82801DB/DBL/DBM AC97 Audio vendor: Hewlett-Packard 
  driver: snd_intel8x0 v: kernel bus ID: 00:1f.5 
  Sound Server: ALSA v: k4.9.0-276-antix.1-486-smp 
Network:
  Device-1: Realtek RTL-8100/8101L/8139 PCI Fast Ethernet Adapter 
  vendor: Hewlett-Packard driver: 8139too v: 0.9.28 port: 3000 
  bus ID: 02:00.0 
  IF: eth0 state: down mac: <filter> 
  Device-2: Broadcom Limited BCM4306 802.11b/g Wireless LAN 
  vendor: Hewlett-Packard driver: b43-pci-bridge v: N/A port: 3000 
  bus ID: 02:06.0 
  IF-ID-1: wlan1 state: up mac: <filter> 
Drives:
  Local Storage: total: 37.26 GiB used: 10.11 GiB (27.1%) 
  ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: Seagate model: ST94019A size: 37.26 GiB 
Partition:
  ID-1: / size: 20.01 GiB used: 10.11 GiB (50.5%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda1 
  ID-2: swap-1 size: 2.00 GiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda4 
Sensors:
  System Temperatures: cpu: 61.0 C mobo: N/A 
  Fan Speeds (RPM): N/A 
Info:
  Processes: 144 Uptime: 10m Memory: 967.3 MiB used: 307.6 MiB (31.8%) 
  Init: SysVinit runlevel: 5 Compilers: gcc: 8.3.0 Shell: bash v: 5.0.3 
  inxi: 3.0.36 
jakersfan@jakersfan:~
$ 

[Author]

Posts