@ Xvid Devs - Packed bitstream option (why bother) ?

[Nexin]

@ Xvid devs

If you are reading this, please delete the packed bitstream option and releated code from the encoder. Was never needed, it also never compressed any video for size gain. A viewer shouldn't have to unpack a video (if they know how) to play correctly. Thanks :)

[Chetwood]

So where's the problem in simply not using the option?

[Nexin]

Well its not that i have twice now had to fix friends files that have downloaded so they can be played. All it took was to unpack them, i used avidemux for that, but it shouldn't happen.

Yes agree if the files were not transcoded with, there would not be a problem. Both files and those that i have had myself which are many are from many release groups. This isn't just a recent problem i have helped others over time. By sending them urls to avidemux and screenshot of what the setting should be for processing (avi unpacked). Always they are xvid files that need unpacking, so far no others.

[Didée]

It seems like you don't even understand the technical reasoning behind bitstream packing. Missing that understanding, you shouldn't request a deletion of the option.


And, "cannot play play files from Release Groups" is not a good reasoning around here, either ...

(If a moderator comes along, you'll see what I mean.)


Well its not that i have twice now had to fix friends files that have downloaded so they can be played. All it took was to unpack them, i used avidemux for that, but it shouldn't happen.

Yes agree if the files were not transcoded with, there would not be a problem. Both files and those that i have had myself which are many are from many release groups. This isn't just a recent problem i have helped others over time. By sending them urls to avidemux and screenshot of what the setting should be for processing (avi unpacked). Always they are xvid files that need unpacking, so far no others.

[Nexin]

I see ok np, just forwarding some feedback. Yes i think if people don't know how to use then better not to have it selected. I don't use it for the same reason, doesn't seem to pack any so never bothered.

What is the technical reason for it been included in xvid. Sure many would like to know this including myself.

[Didée]

Reasons for packed bitstream are e.g. audio/video synchronicity, and ease of (frame accurate) editability.

Problem is that AVI with packed bitsream is not kosher, and AVI without packed bitstream is *also* not kosher. The AVI container originally was not meant to contain video streams with bi-directed frames. The fact that "it works" does not imply that it's a correct thing to do. Basically it is a technical hack (trick), nothing else. And therefore, it makes not much sense to say it should be [this way] or it should be [that way]. Neither one is correct, and both ways have their pro's and their con's. Technically, it should not be at all.

There is the funny situation with standalone players: apart from those that actually play anything, there are SA players that require to use packed bitstream, and there are players that require to NOT use it.

[neuron2]

Both files and those that i have had myself which are many are from many release groups. Did you forget about rule 6 or are you wilfully violating it?

[Chetwood]

I see ok np, just forwarding some feedback.
I'm pretty sure the xvid dev feedback goes along these lines: dude, if you don't know what the heck those options are, don't use them.

[Nexin]

Reasons for packed bitstream are e.g. audio/video synchronicity, and ease of (frame accurate) editability.

Problem is that AVI with packed bitsream is not kosher, and AVI without packed bitstream is *also* not kosher. The AVI container originally was not meant to contain video streams with bi-directed frames. The fact that "it works" does not imply that it's a correct thing to do. Basically it is a technical hack (trick), nothing else. And therefore, it makes not much sense to say it should be [this way] or it should be [that way]. Neither one is correct, and both ways have their pro's and their con's. Technically, it should not be at all.

There is the funny situation with standalone players: apart from those that actually play anything, there are SA players that require to use packed bitstream, and there are players that require to NOT use it.

I know with using various softwares that editing or av correction on packed bitstream files is of no use. Any file will need to be unpacked to do these operations. Playback sometimes is an issue on a pc. Where there has been an edit before transcode to the source file that can stop playback.

The above issues dissapear after unpacking the xvid file. Then is able to be edited. Or able to playback through any previous edits that caused a previous playback issue. The av sync will remain an issue and will need to be corrcted to re-align.

Packed bitstream is either implemented badly with xvid all versions from 1.2.1 or just doesn't work with xvid well.

Guess it could be also users like myself that don't know how to implement pack bitstream correctly for xvid encoding. That is if other settings are needed to be applied besides selecting the packed bitsteam on.

Never seen or read when slecting packed bitstream that x,y,z needs also to be set. Or other settings values need to be adjusted for it to work correctly.

More often i note that (unrestricted) profile is used, where all available xvid encoder settings can be adjusted.

[roozhou]

Why is there no packed bitstream for H264? And all H264 in AVIs on my PC plays flawlessly. IMO packed bitstream is an workaround for obsolete VFW, but not AVI.