Xvid AVC?

[acidsex]

Wow, didnt see that one coming. I definitely forward to january 2006 to see what the boy have come up with.

[BoNz1]

Could this be skal's codec? Because he is the only XviD dev that I know of that is currently working on a H.264 codec and I know he has flirted with the idea of making it open source before.

[woah!]

link? or is the a guess?

[acidsex]

read doom9's codec comparion. thats where I got the info.

codecs for shootout (http://www.doom9.org/index.html?/codecs-main-105-1.htm)

[ChronoCross]

Hopefully it's not vfw. else we might as well flush it down the toilet =P(whew I just read more of the page. looks as though it's cli only). Looks like this avc stuff is gonna have another competitor.

[acidsex]

apparently 3ivx has an avc in the works if what doom9 said about having to wait for one from them. 2006 is definitely going to be one of most anticipated years for video encoding.I am VERY excited about 2k6.

[CruNcher]

if you put 1 and 1 (especialy time constraints) together it can be only Skals work :)

[Sirber]

good to have OS competition for x264 :D

but... is it a bit late?

[CruNcher]

yeah Sirber thats a good question indeed hmm i personaly would find it better if Skal would join X264 or if both codecs would share they development progress @ least

[bond]

according to syskin it has been coded by Skal and gruel and Michael militzer and maybe suxendrol

it is not meant to become opensource

[Doom9]

Hopefully it's not vfw.It pays to read the whole comparison.. there's a list of possible encoding and decoding methods right there on page one;)

[bond]

(except for XviD AVC, it requires a fix that was recently made to mp4box but was not readily available yet, so I used a mp4creator build dated December 20th to mux XviD AVC)any more details?

[stax76]

I wish all this cli codecs would provide a GUI I could invoke from my application because I can't do a GUI with 150 settings for each and every codec I want to support in my application. Only reason I don't support RV10 and WMV is because it would be extremely painful to implement and maintain so I rather focus on the three most popular codecs than doing half baked support for ten different codecs.

[JoeBG]

I wish all this cli codecs would provide a GUI I could invoke from my application because I can't do a GUI with 150 settings for each and every codec I want to support in my application. Only reason I don't support RV10 and WMV is because it would be extremely painful to implement and maintain so I rather focus on the three most popular codecs than doing half baked support for ten different codecs.

And this a good decision looking a the codec comparison from doom9.

x264 and Xvid ar most usefull und used codecs _> so they are important. Then maybe Divx, but nor more.

[Doom9]

any more details?
Here you go:
This is indeed a bug in the media importer, now fixed on CVS.

Multiple SPSs and PPSs are of course supported in the standard, and there is
no restriction on their position in the bitstream.


>>>Also, I think that it's possible to overwrite previous PPS by
signaling a new PPS with same Id at IDR limits.
<<<

This is more problematic for MP4Box, since inclusion/discard of PPS/SPS is
currently based on their IDs - many raw streams indeed repeat the SPS/PPS.
Although this may be safe for broadcast purposes, it is not safe for simple
file storage: you cannot have several SPS/PPS with same ID in the sample
description box (avcC), this would confuse the decoder.
The only way to deal with repeated IDs for SPS/PPS in file is to use a
dedicated SPS/PPS stream, which is not supported by MP4Box at the current
time.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Well... now the XviD AVC codec "rabbit is out of the hat" I guess the forum better gear itself up for some serious, not so serious and down-right stupid questions to be asked :)

Well done the XviD team ;)

[charleski]

I guess the forum better gear itself up for some serious, not so serious and down-right stupid questions to be asked :) Cue another 100 threads on how to use it to encode video for the iPod...

[Sharktooth]

it is not meant to become opensource
.....

[SeeMoreDigital]

Cue another 100 threads on how to use it to encode video for the iPod...I would have thought so....

I'm totally staggered as to why anybody in their right mind would want to buy such a device when all it's been fitted with is a pathetic 4:3 screen.

Oh and lets not forget all those equally limited/crippled PSP's :eek:


Cheers

[Selur]

Does anyone know if it will it be free (for personal use), or is it going to be somethingelse? (Payware?)

[stax76]

it is not meant to become opensource

Makes me wonder if it's right using the name of a open source application for a closed source application. If it was my application I surely wouldn't be happy with it.

[Sirber]

I wish all this cli codecs would provide a GUI I could invoke from my application because I can't do a GUI with 150 settings for each and every codec I want to support in my application.That's why I moved to "quality presets" ;)

[stax76]

That's why I moved to "quality presets"

I'll have to take such a approach as well since I don't see another way. The user that want to play with 150 settings are out of luck then of course with my application.

[JohnV]

Imo XviD AVC is a very good thing to happen. With the reputation of XviD (ASP) I believe it will make AVC more and more familiar to masses. And the AVC hardware support coming in 2006 it will be a great year for all AVC enthusiastics and for everybody who prefers quality what AVC is capable of delivering. :)

[Sirber]

I'll have to take such a approach as well since I don't see another way. The user that want to play with 150 settings are out of luck then of course with my application.If you can play with 150 settings you are capable too of using the CLI directly :) (talking about the end user)

[Isibaar]

Makes me wonder if it's right using the name of a open source application for a closed source application. If it was my application I surely wouldn't be happy with it.

Guys, XviD AVC will certainly become open-source. The code will be uploaded as a new dev tree to CVS after the christmas holidays and will be released under GPL as usual (and perhaps dual-licensed also under an additional OS license). But now it's first time for some rest over the christmas holidays and the New Year break... ;)

[Sharktooth]

Imo XviD AVC is a very good thing to happen. With the reputation of XviD (ASP) I believe it will make AVC more and more familiar to masses. And the AVC hardware support coming in 2006 it will be a great year for all AVC enthusiastics and for everybody who prefers quality what AVC is capable of delivering. :)
Good for some aspects but very bad for some other ones.
I wont be using Windows forever (at least i will definatly stop when Vista will hit the shelves) and since xvid avc is not open source as his smaller brother, it wont be included in any linux distros, and maybe it wont be even possible to have it working on my preferred distro.
Remember the reasons why GNU/Linux born... the freedom for everyone to learn/research/study/program/have fun/etc. with a personal computer and that's only possible if the sources of applications will be kept "open".
But maybe some of you is too young to remember...

[stax76]

I must admit (and apologies) that my comment was stupid because I didn't even exactly know who was originally, is and will be involved in the development. I know only some of the devs around this forum. At least we know now that'll be open source :D and that is great.

[virus]

I'm not sure whether having two H.264 OS codecs may actually have more advantages than disadvantages. But I know for sure that I'd like to see more people join the development of x264 instead of seeing dispersion towards different projects (anyone remembers hdot264 or similar stuff?). Keep in mind that a consistent part of the work behind x264 today still basically comes from a single person. Anyway, good luck to the developers. I guess another challenger won't hurt.

virus

[sysKin]

Guys, XviD AVC will certainly become open-source. The code will be uploaded as a new dev tree to CVS after the christmas holidays and will be released under GPL as usual (and perhaps dual-licensed also under an additional OS license). But now it's first time for some rest over the christmas holidays and the New Year break... ;)

Hey this is great news :)

[Sharktooth]

i simply "missed" that post :)

[charleski]

Imo XviD AVC is a very good thing to happen. With the reputation of XviD (ASP) I believe it will make AVC more and more familiar to masses.
It is interesting that the Xvid 'brand' has become very powerful, purely through word-of-mouth and excellent software (cue your preferred OSS evangelist). Obviously the current build is still early development, but we look forward to seeing how it compares to the already excellent x264 (which isn't as distinctive a brand-name, btw :) ) in a few months.

[Teegedeck]

Sheesh, I would have bet my pants that in the end the old XviD team would simply unite with pengvado and possibly rename the result 'XviD264' or something. Well, good thing I didn't bet my pants! :D

[skal]

it is not meant to become opensource


?!

Of course it is. But as Isibaar said, we need some rest and to gather some
strength for the initial release. Mind you, most of the critical code was written
during the last week(-ends), and i wouldn't recommend it as something to read
before going to sleep ;) So, no: Christmas is 2 days from here, and it's not reasonable
to start putting up the cvs right now. I'm sorry, i'm just human ;)

Now, i'm personnally quite happy we succeeded in taking part of Doom9's comparison.
Ok, we didn't make it to the final round, and i'm ok with that. It's Doom9's choice, and
i wouldn't be taking part of a competition if not willing to accept the outcome of it.

Still, looking at the Doom9's snapshots, i quite like what i see there. As usual, we
targetted keeping a fair amount of details, and i'd say they are there. Don't you? Now it
seems XviD-AVC is still not ok on the rest (including speed)(damned SMP code
that refused to work! :)), but it's better to know the problems than not. After all, it's
just the beginning of Xvid-AVC!

bye!
-Skal

[DryFire]

Why start a new AVC codec from scratch? Will you be heading in a different direction then x264?

Creative differences?

[skal]

Hi DryFire

Why start a new AVC codec from scratch? Will you be heading in a different direction then x264?
Creative differences?

Actually we started with the decoder, which took quite some time. Afterward, well,
adding the encoder within the decoder's stuff was just a matter of habit.

bye!
Skal

[Sharktooth]

was about to ask the same thing... why not joining the forces in a single OSS avc codec?

[Doom9]

why not joining the forces in a single OSS avc codec?By the same token one could ask why there are different versions of *BSD, different Linux distros, different ASP codecs (XviD isn't the only one), or more close at home.. why there's GK, MeGUI, StaxRip, RealAnime, AutoGK, AVI.NET, etc. Some time it may make little sense in the global picture, but you can ask the same question about all these projects and probably will never get an answer that makes sense to the uninvolved. In a larger sense, you could also ask the question for commercial projects.. there's usually some measure of choice as well.

[IgorC]

I´m not dev but I think Devs of Xvid dont want just join x264 then they would be in center of development and won´t influence to it. Indeed if they will present a good piece like Xvid AVC. I'm also wish that x264+Xvid AVC. Both are open source. It would be Killer AVC codec :)

[Selur]

I thing the main reason for writing stuff that someone else had written before is to really learn something,..

[CruNcher]

@Isibaar and Skal
Wonderfull to see it become Opensource bigo and yes as Selur said it it is a learning process and if i think different about it the more Opensource codes are out there the higher the better is the possibility that at least one is gonna survive if one closes whyever it's doors the other is still in development :)

[CEC]

Great news! Are you going to keep the same page "www.xvid.org", or are you going to make a new one?

[DeathTheSheep]

Suggestion: www.xvidavc.org
Ya know, if you'd like to keep the two versions seperate to avoid confusion 'er nothin'.

[CEC]

Suggestion: www.xvidavc.org
Ya know, if you'd like to keep the two versions seperate to avoid confusion 'er nothin'.

I like that! I think that they must be separate too, to avoid confusion!

[CruNcher]

argh and now someone is gonna grab that url before (not only good people are arround here)

actually i think it would be enought todo http://avc.xvid.org :) (doesn't cost as much and fits perfect)

[bond]

great to see that it will become opensource

but actually is the name "xvid avc" chosen wisely? imho it will only lead to massive confusion as being a different incompliant codec than xvid of course

[Isibaar]

was about to ask the same thing... why not joining the forces in a single OSS avc codec?

Well, that reminds me of the very early days of XviD where people suggested we should better join forces with the libavcodec or the fame guys instead of working on something new. Looking back, I don't think it is such a bad thing that we now have both libavcodec and XviD. And the competition certainly helped both projects.

Also: having more developers on the same playground does not _necessarily_ mean better outcome or faster development.

great to see that it will become opensource

but actually is the name "xvid avc" chosen wisely? imho it will only lead to massive confusion as being a different incompliant codec than xvid of course

We have added new encoder features to XviD numerous times in the past. Many of these rendered old XviD decoder versions 'incompliant' to a new version of the encoder. E.g. with the addition of b-frames or qpel or gmc in dev-api-3 and dev-api-4 older versions of XviD couldn't handle the outcome of the new encoders anymore at all. Still everything worked out rather fine without renaming the codec multiple times ;)

Moreover XviD has always supported numerous MPEG-4 profiles: MPEG-4 SP and ASP of course and older versions additionally also had support for the rather exotic ARTS profile. AVC is nothing else than a new MPEG-4 profile. So when XviD already supports numerous profiles why should adding another one now yield to massive confusion? ;)

[LiFe]

Moreover XviD has always supported numerous MPEG-4 profiles: MPEG-4 SP and ASP of course and older versions additionally also had support for the rather exotic ARTS profile. AVC is nothing else than a new MPEG-4 profile.
Great stuff. Would like to see it all as one XviD/MPEG4 package that will decode everything, and will have selectable profiles for encoding.

[akupenguin]

Moreover XviD has always supported numerous MPEG-4 profiles: MPEG-4 SP and ASP of course and older versions additionally also had support for the rather exotic ARTS profile. AVC is nothing else than a new MPEG-4 profile. So when XviD already supports numerous profiles why should adding another one now yield to massive confusion? ;)
Calling AVC a profile of MPEG-4 *is* the confusion. It's a completely separate standard with no details in common, just trying to capitalize on the name "MPEG-4".
That said, I see nothing wrong with having one program "XviD" able to encode multiple formats. After all, I'm a member of libavcodec...

[dragongodz]

Hopefully it's not vfw. else we might as well flush it down the toilet
will people please stop with these stupid "vfw is evil" statements ? if you dont want to use a program that works through vfw then dont but on the same hand dont tell me or others not to use what we wish to either. it is not up to you or anybody else to tell people how they must do things or with what.

Calling AVC a profile of MPEG-4 *is* the confusion. It's a completely separate standard with no details in common, just trying to capitalize on the name "MPEG-4".
have to agree, the consortium calling it part 10 didnt really make it stand out as being something far more advanced. :)

still cant wait to see how these guys have done.

[ChronoReverse]

will people please stop with these stupid "vfw is evil" statements ? if you dont want to use a program that works through vfw then dont but on the same hand dont tell me or others not to use what we wish to either. it is not up to you or anybody else to tell people how they must do things or with what.

Except in the case of H.264, it's a pretty valid statement since AVI simply doesn't let H.264 stretch its legs.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

will people please stop with these stupid "vfw is evil" statements ? if you dont want to use a program that works through vfw then dont but on the same hand dont tell me or others not to use what we wish to either. it is not up to you or anybody else to tell people how they must do things or with what.

I have to agree 100% !!! :goodpost:

I use VFW Codecs in VirtualDub all the time (most x264) and it works absolutely perfect for me :) So why changing something that already works fine? If a Codec does not support VFW, this is a reason for me not to use this Codec :( Really sad, since I expect this new Codec to be good...

[bond]

Well, that reminds me of the very early days of XviD where people suggested we should better join forces with the libavcodec or the fame guys instead of working on something new. Looking back, I don't think it is such a bad thing that we now have both libavcodec and XviD. And the competition certainly helped both projects.

Also: having more developers on the same playground does not _necessarily_ mean better outcome or faster development.i guess sharktooth sees it the way i see it and this is, as a user, i only need one codec ;)

anyways nothing wrong with what you guys do, i would have just found it better if your work would have been merged with another avc codec (x264), than with an asp codec (and xvid is simply an asp codec...)

somehow i fear the total confusion coming up on doom9 and in the newbie users field, no idea till now how to manage this format mix introduced coming up... :D

[Sagittaire]

And why not complete MPEG4 solution for XviD ... ???

- ISO 14496-2 (Video), e.g. Advanced Simple Profile (ASP)
- ISO 14496-3 (Audio), Advanced Audio Coding (AAC)
- ISO 14496-10 (Video), Advanced Video Coding (AVC)
- ISO 14496-14 (Container), MP4 container format (uses the .mp4 extension)
- ISO 14496-17 (Subtitles), MPEG-4 Timed Text subtitle format

[dragongodz]

Except in the case of H.264, it's a pretty valid statement since AVI simply doesn't let H.264 stretch its legs.
not stretching its legs is not the same as saying it should be flushed down the toilet. for example i have tested x264 against xvid, full dvd resolution with 1 b-frame and no b-frame pyramid at a lowish bitrate and found the x264 encode to look easily better to me. it also had no playback problem, again for me. could i have probably got even better from using the cli version ? yes but thats not the point. the vfw x264 still provided a noticable improvement xvid so was still very much of use to me.

hopefully the guys will provide a vfw version later even if they limit some of the options that they think may cause problems.

anyway enough off-topic talk from me. :)

[bond]

may i propose the name "xavc" for this new codec :)

[Doom9]

There's NeroDigital and NeroDigital AVC as well and we seem to handle this just fine. I don't think it's such a bad thing that people require a little bit about standards.. this is not a newbie board after all, we require a certain kind of knowledge to begin with when people sign up and have strict rules to enforce this - like rule 1.

[slavickas]

err shouldn't it be called "CVA XviD"? :)

[mod]

Just an idea.. what about X3MD? :D

[Caroliano]

err shouldn't it be called "CVA XviD"? :)
I don't think so because Xvid isn't a PSA codec :)

But I think it will cause alot of confusion, especialy outside of here. I will have a hard time explaning this for newbies in others foruns I'm in. And Nerodigital and Nerodigital AVC cause confusio, not so much because they are relatively unknown yet.

And in with forum it will be? The best would be this forum, but Xvid forum seems as adequate as this for discuss Xvid AVC. Doom9 mods will have a hard time moving posts...

Anyway, in the comparison, I liked the visual of Xvid AVC in the screenshots. More detailed than x264 and almost the same as Ateme, sometimes superpassing. But I can saw the blocking problem even in the screenshot, so it shoud be worse when play the video.

Continue with the good work. And as it is also an OS project, one can borrow code from another if necessary.

[anne_so78]

a naming ceremony with cake and wine would be nice then...

[Doom9]

I said it in the thread in the XviD forum already.. please wait for the programmers to ask for name suggestions before making any. Thank you.

[bob0r]

As long as they will use SVN for the source, i am ready for it :sly:

[Sirber]

as long as they have a CLI with AVS as input... :D

[Doom9]

as long as they have a CLI with AVS as input.Another one just to read the headlines? If you bother to read the whole article, or just page one for that matter.. the usability section is very informative...

[Koepi]

I'm looking forward to the release. There's sure much to do in regard to windows-tools (i.e. like building a "crippling" vfw-frontend :p or a avs2xvidavc-gui).

Will be fun! :)

Cheers
Koepi

[Romario]

Hi Koepi, you are really great developer. Are you involved, officialy, in development of XVid AVC codec. Can you be more precize, please.

[sasam]

Any news about xvid avc?

[Doom9]

no news is news too ;)

[sasam]

no news is news too ;)

No, no news is just no news :p
If you say it is news then put it on the frontpage ;) :
http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/2553/xvid6nj.th.gif (http://img357.imageshack.us/my.php?image=xvid6nj.gif)

...so are they writing the code completely from scratch or are they using some parts from ASP encoder?

[fight2win]

[QUOTE=sasam]No, no news is just no news :p
If you say it is news then put it on the frontpage ;) :
http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/2553/xvid6nj.th.gif (http://img357.imageshack.us/my.php?image=xvid6nj.gif)

:D Right on Brother, Just be careful, or u just might get BANNED

[sasam]

why? Its just a joke...;)

[Kostarum Rex Persia]

Well, something is definitely going on, because Doom9 removed link about Xvid AVC on main Doom9 page.

[Doom9]

lol.. sasam posted a mockup of my news, not something that was actually ever there

[SeeMoreDigital]

He obviously did too good a job for some people ;)

[sasam]

You actually thought that screenshot was actual screenshot of doom9.org :D
I made it for fun, and to make some people laugh...;)

[shon3i]

No seriously, what haapend with XviD AVC, any news, beta test version, some inforamtion.

[bond]

yes there are informations, news and beta versions of xvid avc...

[Kostarum Rex Persia]

But where, where, where. I can't see informations about Xvid AVC? Are you joking, bond.

[nickolasemp]

Apparently there are only for testing purposes -see the 2005 codec comparison. Not for the public... I'm eager to see what xvid avc will look like. I'm used to the idea of encoding with xvid and I would like to see the differences between x264 and xvid avc. I think that xvid will be a bit better supposing that xvid guys know a lot more in the video domain. I personally like xvid because it has clearer pictures than x264. Could it be because one is ASP and the other is AVC -a difference in standards?

Anyway I'm eager too to see the xvid team to launch their xvid avc even if it is buggy...

[sasam]

I think that xvid will be a bit better supposing that xvid guys know a lot more in the video domain.
What makes you think so? akupenguin will kick xvid avc's butt!:D
Its good having competition...

[Sirber]

Free vs Corporate is fun
Free vs Free is bad :p

[sasam]

At least it is good for us, the users. :p

[nickolasemp]

I never implied I wanted to see those two competing. I just believe that xvid will be better in more ways and especially in the factor clearness.

IMHO I don't think that x264 is as clear as xvid.

[rushin_911]

I never implied I wanted to see those two competing. I just believe that xvid will be better in more ways and especially in the factor clearness.

IMHO I don't think that x264 is as clear as xvid.

That may be an issue more with the options you're choosing than with x264 itself

[Sirber]

AVC vs ASP...

XviD AVC will look more like x264 than xvid ;)

[Kostarum Rex Persia]

AVC vs ASP...

XviD AVC will look more like x264 than xvid ;)

Sirber, obviously you know something that we, common users, don't know about Xvid AVC. Underground information, or...:)

[shon3i]

AVC vs ASP...This two can't be compared, but XviD is very close to x264, ofcurse that is x264 and other H264 codec much better on very low bitretes. XviD AVC seem's to be a good codec and very hard enemy to the x264 and ateme, CoreAVC, etc..

[Doom9]

@KPR: this is the last time I'm going to tell you to cut it out. There's plenty of your posts out there for a second suspension and you know that means a ban.. don't make me go look them up.

And to the rest participating in this thread: there's more productive things to do than idle talk and speculation (keep in mind we have a forum rule for that) - this place isn't a gossip column.. if you want gossip, go to the barber shop or even better the beauty shop (/me runs and hides from the foul fruit coming his way now) Here's a few ideas: Download Visual C# and help with MeGUI for instance, do something with your girlfriend, go out bowling with your friends, watch a movie, whatever floats your boat.

[Kostarum Rex Persia]

Ok, Doom9.

[Romario]

Well, I hope that Xvid AVC will be released until early summer. I am ready to test it.

[Doom9]

And I will reopen when it's out.