XviD Logo

[ron spencer]

Can anyone point me to a black and white XviD logo? I want to use it on lightscribe cds for xvid movies. the official one from the xvid homepage has colors and shading on it. any links?

thanks

[unskinnyboy]

This one?

http://www.xvid.org/themes/BubbleGumSilver/images/logo.gif

If so, its fully grayscale.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Or one of these...

http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/407/xvidlogo9ak.png


Cheers

[ron spencer]

ok thanks!!!!

[JimmyBarnes]

Or one of these...

http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/407/xvidlogo9ak.png


Cheers

Alas the above link goes to the dreaded 404 Not Found.

What I find strange with the matter of the XviD logo is how hard it is to find, especially as a vector graphic that one could use on an XviD disc.

It's strange because the codec (the hard bit) is freely available, but there seems to be some sort of taboo re the use of the XviD logo

If I'm completely wide of the mark here please enlighten me by providing a link to an xvid.wmf / eps /cgm vector graphic

:confused:

[SeeMoreDigital]

Xvid's new logo can be found here: -

http://www.xvid.org/Home-of-the-Xvid-Codec.1.0.html

[smok3]

uf, that xvid page looks like they will become new evil sony or something.

[JimmyBarnes]

Xvid's new logo can be found here: -

http://www.xvid.org/Home-of-the-Xvid-Codec.1.0.html

I was aware of that page but the logo is too small to accurately vectorise (apparently). There is no link on the site to a clipart form (WMF or EPS vector format) of the logo, as exists for DivX.

The beauty of vector images, of course, is that they can be rescaled to any size without loss of resolution, and they do not appear in a rectangular "box" as a raster graphic invariably does. Vector images are like text but appear as the more complex shape that one desires.

[CWR03]

How about this?

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/4945/xvibxj0.png (http://imageshack.us)

[setarip_old]

@CWR03

Hi!

Just wondering - why is the "Registered" symbol is reversed?

[Dark Shikari]

It looks like a mirrored DivX logo... :p

[setarip_old]

It looks like a mirrored DivX logo...Except for the "D"...

[Dark Shikari]

Except for the "D"... Logo above, with two reversals:

http://i33.tinypic.com/whfk2v.png

[setarip_old]

with two reversalsYes, that was quite apparent ;>}

[JimmyBarnes]

It looks like a mirrored DivX logo... :p

It clearly is.

I like this one, tho it's not vector and the similarity to DVD logos is obvious.

PS Dare I say, the "official" XviD logo looks very lame compared to the DivX one. They really should have a competition..

[Ranguvar]

Dare I say, the "official" XviD logo looks very lame compared to the DivX one. They really should have a competition..

LOL... perhaps because the Xvid team puts more work into the actual codec? :p (kidding)

[JimmyBarnes]

LOL... perhaps because the Xvid team puts more work into the actual codec? :p (kidding)

Possibly a programmer's oversight - so busy concentrating on the product they forget the "marketing".. :)

Hard to compare a commercial product with a freebie like XviD.

I'm an XviD fan (mainly becos it's free whereas DivX is not) but objectively I have to note the following:
* DivX seeks easily, Xvid does not (go to next keyframe is a mess)
* DivX uses 2 CPUs, XviD does not (yet)
* XviD (so a leading PC mag says) requires much more PC grunt than does DivX

Well, waddaya expect for nothing :devil:

cheers!

[Dark Shikari]

Possibly a programmer's oversight - so busy concentrating on the product they forget the "marketing".. :)

Hard to compare a commercial product with a freebie like XviD.

I'm an XviD fan (mainly becos it's free whereas DivX is not) but objectively I have to note the following:
* DivX seeks easily, Xvid does not (go to next keyframe is a mess)
* DivX uses 2 CPUs, XviD does not (yet)
* XviD (so a leading PC mag says) requires much more PC grunt than does DivX

Well, waddaya expect for nothing :devil:

cheers!Xvid and DivX are encoders, and both produce the same format of video... :rolleyes:

Both seek just as well as each other, since they produce the same format of video.

While they do include video decoders, neither is very good; ffmpeg's MPEG-4 ASP decoder is supremely fast (faster on one core than DivX is on two).

[Ranguvar]

Xvid does not require more PC "grunt"... and DivX is more multi-threaded, but Xvid is multi-threaded too. And Xvid has VAQ, along with much better setting support...

No offense, but "what do you expect for nothing" is garbage. What about Firefox? pdfsam? GNU+Linux? MPC-HC? Perhaps most notably on this forum, x264?

[JimmyBarnes]

Xvid does not require more PC "grunt"... and DivX is more multi-threaded, but Xvid is multi-threaded too. And Xvid has VAQ, along with much better setting support...

No offense, but "what do you expect for nothing" is garbage. What about Firefox? pdfsam? GNU+Linux? MPC-HC? Perhaps most notably on this forum, x264?

Chill dude, I'm an XviD fan, the question is meant to make fun of my own "criticisms" :eek:

I do know tho that when I encode short clips (< 10 min or so), DivX6 does it ~3 times faster than XviD, simply no contest wrt speed

I've used both extensively and I think they both have their uses.

[Dark Shikari]

I do know tho that when I encode short clips (< 10 min or so), DivX6 does it ~3 times faster than XviD, simply no contest wrt speed"3 times faster" is a meaningless statement when you make no claim as to what settings are being used on either...

[Dark Shikari]

"Similar" settings - H263 quantization, single pass quality based (target quantizer ~ 3), qpel, GMC, keyframes 250.Those aren't really the settings that affect speed too much--what about VHQ, motion precision, etc?

[Didée]

Well, GMC does have a HUGE impact, at least for Xvid.;) JimmyBarnes, disable GMC and compare speed again. (GMC is practically useless anyway, and DivX just has a faster implementation of this useless thing).

However, this has little to do with Xvid's logo, ay?