www.dead-donkey.com https://forum.dead-donkey.com/ |
|
XVID or DIVX (5.05) ? https://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=878 |
Page 1 of 1 |
Author: | ohgodnotanotherone [ Fri Aug 15, 2003 8:57 pm ] |
Post subject: | XVID or DIVX (5.05) ? |
Well I'll keep it brief..... Wich do you prefer ? Xvid is supposed to be the next big thing but so far I haven't been blown away... As a matter of fact , in unexperienced hands ( ie most hands) it's results are sometimes frankly poor..... Now I'm sticking, for the time being, with divx 5.05 - I think the quality is as good as Xvid's , especially with ALL options on, though doing that (bypassing profiles presets) takes unacceptable astronomical time.......(up to 12 hours for 1 cd on a p4 1.7Ghz) ( I can do a Opendivx 4 with a preset WITHIN 4 Hours! and the pic quality is merely a tad sharper) Mind you, I'm planning a rip that starts and ends with a Q for a 2cd ac3 xvid rip.....just not sure wich options I should use/ leave out... Yes monkeysmasher......it's that one ! |
Author: | monkeysmasher [ Fri Aug 15, 2003 10:48 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
as in the south american winged claymation god? not too many q named movies. just in case, here are some things that messed me up, if they seem too basic/obvious, sorry. but just in case- when u installed gknot(i think thats what u use) did you make sure to run vdub/vdubmod mannually once before running gknot? had you tried the virtual dub optimized for p4? its over at doom9.net. i dont use it, but i guess its p4 optimized. set the priority speed in divx5.0x sub page 'general parameters' under 'performance/quality' to something besides 'slowest'? got rid of them wormies eating up cpu juice. make sure your divx.dll files werent corruppted by it. i never used xvid. heard good things bout it, though. too bad new things scare and intimidate me. |
Author: | Polityk [ Sat Aug 16, 2003 12:15 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I don't like xvid. Causes many problems and picture quality is worse than divx. |
Author: | Bassline [ Sat Aug 16, 2003 2:37 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
personally i rip with Xvid using DVDX2.2 but have not tried divx5.05, i have compared previous Divx to Xvid rips and the Xvid has always looked better IMO But each to there own ![]() |
Author: | spudthedestroyer [ Sat Aug 16, 2003 3:13 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
At first, xvid was a crummy choice to rip with. I can remember how shit release groups rips looked when they started using it. However now I think it is a good solid codec, and it has been used for two rips, metallica and Hemoglobin. |
Author: | ohgodnotanotherone [ Sat Aug 16, 2003 6:09 pm ] | ||
Post subject: | |||
That's fine but GKNOT uses virtualdubMOD -at least the newest version I got - Not to sure I can just replace it with virtualdub.... And yes I keep at slowest - It'about quality.....otherwise I might as well do a divx 4.......... And yes ,,,,the winged serpent is coming near you ! ![]() |
Author: | monkeysmasher [ Sat Aug 16, 2003 7:05 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
is there much difference in quality in the different speed settings? i cant tell, but i dont do too many dvds. slowest took 6 hours per pass on one i did last night, and i did the same one on 'medium' took 2 hours, i cant tell the difference. |
Author: | ohgodnotanotherone [ Sat Aug 16, 2003 10:48 pm ] | ||
Post subject: | |||
eh,You did both passes ? AND ALL OPTIONS ? ( some are NOT availible if you have merely 5.02) the "guide "I learned from insists you leave it at slowest |
Author: | monkeysmasher [ Sun Aug 17, 2003 12:44 am ] |
Post subject: | |
i was away today, but i left 'when evelyn came out of her grave' cook on 'medium' 2passed divx 5.05 unless i somehow messed up my codecs trying to fix my audio caps. it looked fine to me. do you mean using the psychovisual effects? i havent messed with them at all, so i think they are whatever the defaults are. i usually go with whatever the last recomenddation is at doom9.net, or whatever default setings are. mind you my eyes dont work properly, and the tv i watch them on is big, at 800x600 NTSC, with a lot of graphics crap and my incredibly low standards. ex. this 't' is about 1 inch tall, or the width of my thumb. i measured. things look completely different on a monitor,so i guess it comes down to personal prefference, or number of complaints/requests. i think doom9 has done a few comparison tests, usually quite frequently. |
Author: | ohgodnotanotherone [ Tue Aug 26, 2003 9:27 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
GNA GNA ![]() I got something that can read DVD again.... Oh look! it can write all of 'em too ! ![]() RIPPING TIME AGAIN! Anyway, was experimenting with Xvid today...It really is a TAD sharper.....but am struggling to get them damn B-frames to work without causing abberative mutalations/mutations/anomaly's .... Especially with interlaced content..... Anyone mastered them yet ? :| |
Author: | DxaKrator [ Tue Aug 26, 2003 9:43 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
![]() |
Author: | ohgodnotanotherone [ Wed Aug 27, 2003 10:58 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Have done multiple Xvid encoding jobs of one movie trailer.... Each time leaving out a option........(b-frames,vhq etc.) I gotta confess something : yes, the movie's dark and I'm watching in a bright room ; yes , I don't have much time to thoroughly analyze them right now ; yes , I'm watching this right now on some 17' aged piece of junk but I'll be Damned if I can make out a significant difference between the 5 versions ! Anyone here who has done xvid who had similar experiences ? |
Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
What's blood for, if not for shedding? |