Future DivX products

[skewbastev]

Hey everyone,

I'm Steven and I'm from DivX. I'll be hanging around here to listen to what you guys would like to see in future DivX products. If you have any likes or dislikes, send them my way either here on this thread or via PM.

:thanks:

[jggimi]

Welcome to Doom9's Forum, skew!

As DigitAl56K has probably told you, this community doesn't pull technical punches.

We do ask that people try to be nice to each other; I think it will be beneficial to remind our community to re-read this little annoucement (http://forum.doom9.org/announcement.php?f=56) before jumping too far down this man's throat in an effort to describe desired products or desired changes to existing products.

[skewbastev]

Thanks J

[sillKotscha]

you could further improve the divx codec as you (DivXNetworks, Inc.) did very nice in the past to keep the No.1 concerning commercial products or at least stay on par with Nero Digital concerning SAPs - in other words squeeze the last bit out of MPEG4-ASP OR go ahead with the future and present us a technical preview of your already developed avc codec... I just assume that already have developed an avc codec under the cover :-) at least a picture of a vfw version is floating around the w³ ...

it's time to split your company into different branches (codec wise) and give support to asp as long as it is needed/ wanted and on the other hand present something new to the enthusiasts . Maybe it is difficult for you (as the company) as DivX is THE de facto standard (for the industry) concerning MPEG4-ASP and maybe you think you'll loose reputation (it is not the right word but I hope you know what I mean) on the market or community when presenting an avc codec BUT remember... it is still MPEG4 !! ;-) and your company just keeps up with future techniques and won't "die" because of missed opportunities...

just my point of view

cheers

[Romario]

From my point of view, DivX have much chances to become industry leading standard.

BTW, DivX should think about breaking MPEG4 specifications, in terms of further improving quality on medium bitrates (550-700 kbps). AVC isn't neccesary for DivX, for now.

Next DivX 6.5 should introduce number of new encoding technologies, and, of course, DivX should stick with MPEG4 ASP. Of course, as I said before, DivX should think about breaking MPEG4 ASP specifications slightly, in order to improve quality. If not, I am afraid that DivX can't evolve much.

DivX AVC should be ready by first half of 2008, that's my honest opinion.

Of course, DivX can introduce new Trellis Quantization which would give better results on low and medium bitrates.

[CruNcher]

hi skewbastev, i agree with sillkotscha to have a post processing sharpening filter is nice but it won't make AVC out of ASP ;) finaly solveing the "Q" mystery i think it would be just the right time for that now and maybe some insights if DivX Inc. is still working on their own Video Codec or if this research is over would also be nice.

[G_M_C]

The most important thing I would like to see is some kind of more advanced (to high quality) authoring possibillities, combined with a authoring programm (not unlike a "DivX-version of DVDlab").

If it is possible to make DivX DVD's with moving menu's, customizable buttons and customizable PGC's etc. etc. Than I would think DivX would be a viable alternative to the DVD-format. Since it can hold longer/better video in the same space. The only thing that lacks is the "user-friendlyness" of DVD's (like menu's and such).

Maybe the Authoring functions could be kept more easy to understand, and easier programmable than DVD's are now. The XML format you're using could be kept simple enough.

I give this example;
I've got a documentary that consists of 5 episodes. Each episode also has a 10 minutes "making off"of that particular episode. Also I have 2 Extra's.

I would like to make a DVD-9 that has all EPS on it, all "making off's" and both extra's. BUT I would like to make some customizable menu's with it, prefably moving "smalls" of the each episode for instance. And, now it comes, i would like to make "custom play buttons";

1) Play only the 5 episodes in a row, with "making off" but without extra's
2) Play EPS'without both
3) Select each part seperately, and return to menu after.
etc.

And maybe in the future it would be nice to add some subtitles and/or other languages (multiple audio-tracks) too, and those have to be selected too ....


Stuff like that is not really doable in DivX atm. Or i cant seem to find a programm that can do that, or that is documented well enough. Above example is kinda difficult offcourse, simpler stuff has to be able too offcourse ;)
If things like this would be possible, DivX could make a big step foreward; Because it can make itself compare-able with the "bigger formats"(DVD/HD-DVD etc. etc.) on usabillity.

And I think many people would be thrilled to have a alternative that has got nothing to do with a format war, but can do next-gen HD material (DivX can allready be used on HD material).

When that step is taken, the next step could be compatabillity by using a next-gen compression technique.

In short, make DivX more like the "bigger formats", but keep the software and functionality to do that more accessable and user-friendly. But the general idear is that it should be the HD-DVD/BR of the general-public/computer-users (aka "for the masses"), simply because it is
MUCH easier accessable and understandable than HD-DVD and such. The slogan could be "everybody can make his/her own HD DVD's !!11~~ ".

PS: Try to keep in mind that a DivX than kan be used for backup-purposes of HD material (including menu's and such), that maybe a (small) problem ... like jealous HD-DVD producers :P

so far my 2 cents.

[weaver4]

I would like to see you commercialize AVC like you have done ASP. With Divx-AVC certified players and such.

[IgorC]

Of course, DivX can introduce new Trellis Quantization which would give better results on low and medium bitrates.
divX's trellis is H.263opt.

there was a poll of features that people wanted to see in future versions on Xvid home page. More than half voted to AVC. It's very clear what people want.

[Hyper Shinchan]

I would like to see you commercialize AVC like you have done ASP. With Divx-AVC certified players and such.
Yes, so in a few of years we'll have the same problems that we have know with those players that claim to be "MPEG-4 ASP complaint". I mean: no qpel, no GMC (no, I'm not right, GMC limited to 1 wp like Divx does:devil: ), packed bitstreams, and so on.
At the moment hardware players like IPod and PSP at least fully complaint to what they say are complaint (IPod 5 AVC Baseline L 3.0, PSP AVC Main 3.0; well, PSP supports L 3.0 fully only with the UMDs, mp4 files are limited to QVGA resolution at the moment).
BTW, DivX should think about breaking MPEG4 specifications, in terms of further improving quality on medium bitrates (550-700 kbps). AVC isn't neccesary for DivX, for now.
You know my opinions about "breaking MPEG-4 specifications" and creating "DivX specifications". They were created for some reason, those specs, don't you think? Anyway XviD offers very high quality compared to DivX, and it's fully complaint. BTW how would they increase quality? They would create a totally new video codec based upon MPEG-4 ASP? O well, that's okay with me, at least I won't hear again that DivX is MPEG-4 complaint.

[xbox360]

This might be small thing but your DivX Converter supports only CBR, it would be good if it supported VBR & CBR.

[olnima]

2 Things:

- interlace encoding
- set and read AR-flags

Olnima

[weaver4]

Yes, so in a few of years we'll have the same problems that we have know with those players that claim to be "MPEG-4 ASP complaint". I mean: no qpel, no GMC (no, I'm not right, GMC limited to 1 wp like Divx does:devil: ), packed bitstreams, and so on.
At the moment hardware players like IPod and PSP at least fully complaint to what they say are complaint (IPod 5 AVC Baseline L 3.0, PSP AVC Main 3.0; well, PSP supports L 3.0 fully only with the UMDs, mp4 files are limited to QVGA resolution at the moment).

If you use the DivX codec and have a DivX certified player, all is well. That is what I meant. "MPEG-4 ASP compliant" was a little bit too much for the first generation silicon manufactures to get their hands (and cost) around. DivX was a reasonable subset of that.

[skewbastev]

Really great feedback guys. Big thanks to everyone for taking a few minutes to post your thoughts.


The DivX Codec seems to be quite the attention hog on this thread ;-)
Here's a question I have for you guys- Do you use any other DivX products besides the DivX Codec? Why / why not?

[Manao]

- interlace encodingAlready done
I would like to see you commercialize AVC like you have done ASP. With Divx-AVC certified players and suchThe second part won't happen, since AVC will have an existence of itself besides an hypothetical DivX AVC codec. Any blueray / hddvd player will have enough processing power needed to play anything AVC compliant you could throw at it. It would be hard then to justify the existence of additionnal "profiles".DivX should think about breaking MPEG4 ASP specifications slightlyAs soon as they break it, they can go all the way, since it would make the already existing DivX players unable to play those new streams. But if they break them for efficiency purposes, they have to end up with a standard at least as efficient as AVC, because AVC players will be out quite soon.

[numaios]

This might be small thing but your DivX Converter supports only CBRIs this true? Are you sure? Maybe constant quantizer, but constant bitrate... :eek:

[bratao]

Steve Lhomme, slhomme divxcorp com do yestarday a patch to show.c at libavcodec

So, maybe the divx team is making a new codec based on wavelet.

If the team get a real quality boost changing the macroblocks algoritimic to wavelets, i think that this should be a good move.

Think that a Divx-avc certification can´t be possible because the blueray machines out there. And the Divx need a way to get money in the future.

Note that all is speculation

[CruNcher]

But not @ all a bad speculation brato, the truth is AVC/VC-1 Asian Player are pretty useless as AVC/VC-1 are heavily supported and a official DVD sucessor format not like ASP a niche thing for some geeks ;) , but the real question is how will consumer support endup to be on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players, till now no consumer products are out their that are able to make usage of AVC or VC-1 in for examlpe .EVO (HD-DVD) and playback on those "official Player" :)
Same goes for Blu-Ray, but still AVC Asia players are needed by those that have all their content archived in (ASP) as the official players never gonna support DivX3,4,5,6 Xvid and the other ASP codecs the only player that seems to be a big difference in those regards most probably is gonna to be the PS3 as Sony said they won't restrict it to their own formats (non interoperable) stuff like they did in the past (nice task if it's real).

[Manao]

bratao : Steve Lhomme is only trying to make lavc nicer to compile with MSVC, because lavc is used in the DivX's encoding application. So it was all pure speculation indeed :)

[Leica]

DivX can encode interlaced video BUT not decode it!

When playing encoded DivX files in Windows Media Player you get nasty combing (weave), while with Windows Media Encoder the encoded interlaced WMV files play hardware de-interlaced perfectly!

This is a BIG limitation of DivX :(

[Your_Idol]

The only thing DivX needs is de-interlaced on playback and to set and read AR-flags.

It would also be good if the Dr could read and fix mpeg2 audio skew for the noobs.

[Leica]

The only thing DivX needs is de-interlaced on playback and to set and read AR-flags.

Amen to that.

I encode so much TV stuff which is all interlaced. And I want the interlacing preserved! So at present I am (reluctantly) forced to compress with Windows Media Encoder with the crappy WMV container.

Please DivX get the interlacing working for decoding! I mean come on you are a public company now! You are worth (as of noon EST Nov-3-2006), US $769,580,000. That is SEVEN HUNDRED AND SIXTY NINE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY THOUSAND DOLLARS!!!

[Bathrone]

xbox 360 divx support. In blogs Microsoft have talked about licencing restrictions. Surerly you could agree with MS on a licence to sell it on xbox live or something. You should see the number of people who are asking for this.

[Mtz]

The most important thing I would like to see is some kind of more advanced (to high quality) authoring possibillities, combined with a authoring programm.
DivXMediaBuilder can do that at this moment. Make some search in this forum.

enjoy,
Mtz

[Slitheen]

From my point of view, DivX have much chances to become industry leading standard.

BTW, DivX should think about breaking MPEG4 specifications, in terms of further improving quality on medium bitrates (550-700 kbps). AVC isn't neccesary for DivX, for now.

Next DivX 6.5 should introduce number of new encoding technologies, and, of course, DivX should stick with MPEG4 ASP. Of course, as I said before, DivX should think about breaking MPEG4 ASP specifications slightly, in order to improve quality. If not, I am afraid that DivX can't evolve much.

DivX AVC should be ready by first half of 2008, that's my honest opinion.

Of course, DivX can introduce new Trellis Quantization which would give better results on low and medium bitrates.

But we're entering an age where storage capacity isn't much of an issue any more. So why waste time on trying to make really small filesizes and small bitrates look good?

[Manao]

Because "small bitrate" is relative to the resolution. Small bitrate for 1920x1080 isn't what you consider "small", and you will be happy to be able to have it look good @ 4 mbit ( which is a low bitrate for 1080p ).

And storage capacity will always be an issue, because everything increases as fast as the storage capacities.

[Slitheen]

Because "small bitrate" is relative to the resolution. Small bitrate for 1920x1080 isn't what you consider "small", and you will be happy to be able to have it look good @ 4 mbit ( which is a low bitrate for 1080p ).



He was talking about bitrates much smaller than that.

And storage capacity will always be an issue, because everything increases as fast as the storage capacities.

I don't see how that applies here.

[Romario]

But we're entering an age where storage capacity isn't much of an issue any more. So why waste time on trying to make really small filesizes and small bitrates look good?

Well, I like to encode video at 400 or 500 kbps in x264 codec, so I think that future DivX codec must improve quality in medium bitrates (500 to 650 kbps).

Of course, who knows what DivX devs could decide? Perhaps we could expect AVC?

[IgorC]

He was talking about bitrates much smaller than that.
I don't see how that applies here.
?
HD rip to single DVD. That's issue for divX. internet streaming, mobile, satelital TV ..etc etc etc.
Videocompression is here not only fot crapy dvdrips.

[baer999]

I would like to see an AVC Codec which is nearly as good as x264. I like the new menu in the container but I encode in AVC so I can't take the menu with the AVC (x264) movies. If DivX would make a good AVC codec I would use this because of the menu support.

[SeeMoreDigital]

If DivX would make a good AVC codec I would use this because of the menu support.If DivX ever got around to producing an AVC encoder, I would need reassurance that its performance would not be crippled by placing such streams within DXN's ".divx" container.... Which (as we know) has its roots firmly planted in the .AVI container pot!

The last thing we need from DivX is MPEG-4 AVC in .AVI :devil:

[baer999]

Yes of course that would be great if the container would be chooseable...
What does the DivX team plans to do in future?

[Hyper Shinchan]

If DivX ever got around to producing an AVC encoder, I would need reassurance that its performance would not be crippled by placing such streams within DXN's ".divx" container.... Which (as we know) has its roots firmly planted in the .AVI container pot!

The last thing we need from DivX is MPEG-4 AVC in .AVI :devil:
Of course. They could use MP4 and syncronize their profile with the Nero Digital ones, so an hardware player could be compatible with both the encoder without problems. For the menu a chanche could be to use MPEG-4 systems (I could also start to love DivX if this will happen).
Until now DivX said "we don't change our file format to keep backward compatibility with our costumers that purchased an old DivX player", but now if they add AVC there won't be no problem of bc compatibility.
EDIT: a feature that could be interesting and that could be added is a PSP/I-Pod output profile in their encoder utility.... but it requires AAC licenses I think....

[numaios]

I completely agree with you:
I would need reassurance that its performance would not be crippled by placing such streams within DXN's ".divx" container.... Which (as we know) has its roots firmly planted in the .AVI container pot!
They could use MP4 and syncronize their profile with the Nero Digital onesMaybe if DXN decides to use *.mp4, all the standalones will support *.mp4, and we'll be able to move on and leave AVI.

[G_M_C]

DivXMediaBuilder can do that at this moment. Make some search in this forum.

enjoy,
Mtz

I'm not shure it would work on compositions that spam a complete DVD, consisting of 3 AVI's of 1,3 Gb (the episodes)and 3 AVI's of 125 Mb (the 10 minute extra's of each episode).

The episodes are encoded @ 3700 kbps DivX + 224 kbps MP3; the extra's are encoded @ 1750 kbps DivX + 192 kbps MP3.

I could steal a little bit of bitrate (from the audio of the episodes for instance) from the main features to make some extra room for the menu's. But reading through a couple of posts suggested that DivX' menu-system files dont span multiple AVI's (each AVI having its own menu).

What I want to do compares to to Episode DVD's with multiple VTS' and 1 menu. And I haven't found any example for a DivX-version of the same idea.

[skewbastev]

What I want to do compares to to Episode DVD's with multiple VTS' and 1 menu. And I haven't found any example for a DivX-version of the same idea.

On the topic of creating DivX menus, what are some of the high level features you guys like, or would like to see?

For instance, I tend to throw alot of random videos into one DivX media format video, so I really like the ability to customize each menu screen with its own background image / music to reflect the contents of that menu screen. But that's just me...what are some of your guys' "wish-list features"?

[Romario]

Well, in terms of improving quality, DivX team should think about introduce qpel in ALL modes of compression, half-pel must be eliminated.

Of course, SSE3 and SSSE3 optimizations are necessary for new Core 2 Duo.

[G_M_C]

On the topic of creating DivX menus, what are some of the high level features you guys like, or would like to see?

For instance, I tend to throw alot of random videos into one DivX media format video, so I really like the ability to customize each menu screen with its own background image / music to reflect the contents of that menu screen. But that's just me...what are some of your guys' "wish-list features"?

For the future for DivX there are many possibillities; But some restraint has to be kept, because current users of DivX don’t wanna be left out. So (some) backwards compatabillity is, in my opinion, crucial.

This is especially important because there are many thousands of “divx certified” players out there; When you render many of them virtually useless, the name “DivX” would be easily destroyed. So with that in mind, big changes have to be made carefully.

On the menu side of things this could be done by changing the .divx container to be able to play “external files”, i.e. files that are of the DivX format, but aren’t in the container itself. The .divx-container would then be kind of like the .m3u-playlists, but much more sophisticated.

This kind of DivX container could then, in itself be 2Gb long; Making it possible to have much more sophisticated options. This leads to a second remark; Why doesn’t divx use the OpenDML: standard anyway, that would make an end to the 2Gb problem anyway !

Having a seperate .divx container like this (in general like the seperate .VTS with the menu’s on DVD’s) means that it can be made backwards compatible. If its a “current generation” divx container, it will just have commands pointing to destinations within the container itself, one of them beeing the movie itself. The next generation can also have “externall” commands, pointing to movies that are simply somewhere else on the disc.

In the same general idea commands could be added that make more sophisticated control possible (current gen just ignores them or something like that). And on the subject of control or menu-functions; The divx container should at least have the same level of possibillities like DVD’s have now.

But all this mentioned has to be considerated as “optional” ! Because many people would not need any autoring functions anyway. People shuld be able to “get” the codec/authoring/playing seperately. Like the DivX codec i’ve got; I dont ever use DivX creator, i shouldnt have got it in the first place ?

And last but certainly important: Make authoring possible on for the general public. So make it easy to use, make it easy to learn etc. This is really important, because with all the possibillities i’ve now written down, DivX could be the container for all those amateur DV camara users, that only wanna make a DVD of the first steps of their children, or their pets (in fact one of the biggest possible userbases in video-world !) They would like to use menu’s and the buttons on their remotes too (read: show of their creations) :p

[skewbastev]

all those amateur DV camara users, that only wanna make a DVD of the first steps of their children, or their pets (in fact one of the biggest possible userbases in video-world !) They would like to use menu’s and the buttons on their remotes too (read: show of their creations) :p

Definitely a good point. I'm curious as to how many of you currently make DVDs of DV video you've shot?

Big thanks to everyone for posting your thoughts. While we obviously cannot implement every single idea on this thread, it's been very valuable to hear your opinions. So keep 'em coming! We'll continue to hang around and listen to what you guys have to say. Feel free to PM me or shoot me an email at schien@divxcorp.com

Here's a 5 minute survey if y'all got time to spare:
Digital Video Survey (http://divx2-metrics.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/divx2_metrics.cfg/websurveys/ws?_133=122)
It has some pretty general questions asking how you organize your digital video collection among other things. Again, feel free to post your concerns on this thread or PM or email me.

Have a good one!

[Manao]

Well, in terms of improving quality, DivX team should think about introduce qpel in ALL modes of compression, half-pel must be eliminated.Even though hpel is better when the source was a mpeg2 that has not been resized ? hpel has its uses.

[G_M_C]

Definitely a good point. I'm curious as to how many of you currently make DVDs of DV video you've shot?
[...]


None, I'm the one that puts stuff on DVD's, and who knows what (sometimed ridiculous) features people like to have ;)

But for myself, I organize my caps (dvb/hdtv) on DVD's using DivX/XviD.

[jggimi]

I have moved the Qpel discussion to its own thread:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=118297

[skewbastev]

thanks J

[LordRPI]

I want DigitAl56K back. He was da man!

[CrashUK]

how about divx 7 hd vs HD-dvd?

[bond]

how about divx 7 hd vs HD-dvd?you dont need a new codec for encoding HD. you can encode HD even with divx3...

[Romario]

you dont need a new codec for encoding HD. you can encode HD even with divx3...

Yes, but results are very bad with DivX 3.11.

[shon3i]

Yes, but results are very bad with DivX 3.11.
Nope, it will be very good, maybe, better than DivX 6

[Romario]

Are you sure, Shon3i. DivX 3.11 is crap.

[bond]

Divx3 is defacto a mpeg-4 simple profile encoder, i would be very surprised if it could provide better quality than xvid or divx6 for HD at the same bitrate

[shon3i]

Are you sure, Shon3i. DivX 3.11 is crap.
Yes, and DivX3 isn't crap if used with nandub or used in ffdshow, DivX3 is to old and isn't mpeg4 compactible, so why is leaved, but sometimes can have better quality than any codec

[jggimi]

Romario apparently missed this announcement (http://forum.doom9.org/announcement.php?f=56). In Doom9's codec comparisons (http://www.doom9.org/codec-comparisons.htm), DivX 3.11 SBC (using Nandub) compared extremely well several years running.

[setarip_old]

@Romario

Hi!

I've been a member of the, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" club for years - and have continued to use DivX v.3.11 alpha since it first appeared in 1999/2000.

When used in conjunction with "MPEG Mediator" (and using CBR .MP3 audio), it continues to yield what I consider to be very good results ;>}