DivX playback on DVD Player not working

[MrVideo]

I'm having real problems trying to find the 4.x certification specification for DVD players that are supposed to be able to play back DivX AVI wrapped files.

I'm using the SUPER program to recode to 720x480 anamorphic widescreen, 29.97 fps video. The bitrate is set to 1296 and the audio is MP3. MEncoder is being used.

Yet, no one is able to play said output on DVD players. I can play it just fine on my Blu-ray, but it is a lot newer.

One person's DVD player has no video or audio, but the time display shows that it is being played at 2x.

Any ideas as to why playback is not working?

Also: When the encoding is started, the option for DivX player compatibility is selected.

[7ekno]

I found the problem!

I'm using the SUPER

Try a converter where the author of the application knows the ins & outs of video encoding and care a little about their products :P

Something like MeGUI, StaxRip, HDConvertToX, XviD4PSP, AutoGK or Handbrake v0.93 ... all of which have some form of "Standalone Player" settings that actually work (personally tested all but Handbrake and AutoGK here) ...

7ek

[MrVideo]

I found the problem!

I also believe that the issue is with SUPER, but have no proof one way or the other.

Something like MeGUI, StaxRip, HDConvertToX, XviD4PSP, AutoGK or Handbrake v0.93 ... all of which have some form of "Standalone Player" settings that actually work (personally tested all but Handbrake and AutoGK here) ...

MeGUI is not an encoder program. It is a GUI shell that calls other programs to do the dirty work.

I'll look into a couple of the others.

[MrVideo]

I'm having a couple of users try the output I did from HDConvertToX. The XviD4PSP program appears to be dead. No update activity and no Doom9 forum activity.

[Przemek_Sperling]

Try avi.net from www.clonead.co.uk. I use it with Jawor's Xvid compilation http://jawormat.republika.pl/xvid.html (currently 1.3.2) The results are great.

[7ekno]

Yeah, forgot avi.NET, probably one of the best when source is DVD!

As for XviD4PSP, try here (still doing nightly builds):
http://www.winnydows.com/

XviD4PSP's "Standard" AVI profile is the most hardware compatible one ;)

As far as MeGUI goes, as long as it has a standalone AVI player profile, does it matter what I call it (since all the others effectively also just call other programs like XviD, VirtualDub, AVIMux_GUI, etc) ?!?

7ek

[MrVideo]

I'm still awaiting results on the HDConvertToX test.

As for programs like MeGUI, it would be nice to list programs that are standalone as such and programs that are GUI wrappers that depend on other programs and what settings work the best. For MeGUI, saying that it has
DivX standalone player settings, would be better.

[MrVideo]

Well, HDConvertToX didn't work either. The video is 720x480 anamorphic widescreen 16:9. 59.94 fps.

In this case the video at least showed up (a first), but the anamorphic widescreen was lost, i.e., it fulled the 4:3 screen instead of being letterboxed.

The audio was out-of-sync and all of it was choppy.

The DivX 4.x DVD player specs would come in real handy.

[SeeMoreDigital]

What's the make and model number of your (MPEG-2/MPEG-4) hardware player?

Not all hardware players or their A/V decoding chip-sets support anamorphic MPEG-4 decoding!

Sufficed to say, you could be spending hours trying to do something that wont ever work with your hardware player!

[7ekno]

Yeah, square pixel is the only option for broad XviD/DivX hardware compatibility :(

7ek

[MrVideo]

What's the make and model number of your (MPEG-2/MPEG-4) hardware player?

Not my player. Belongs to someone else. I can get the info, but based upon your next statement and the post after yours, it probably isn't worth getting.

Not all hardware players or their A/V decoding chip-sets support anamorphic MPEG-4 decoding!

Now that is just plain stupid. It is not as if anamorphic widescreen is a new concept.

Sufficed to say, you could be spending hours trying to do something that wont ever work with your hardware player!

OK, square pixel it is. I did create a 720x400, but haven't heard back on that one yet.

[MrVideo]

Yeah, square pixel is the only option for broad XviD/DivX hardware compatibility :(

And that is just plain stupid, as mentioned above.

Sigh! :mad:

[MrVideo]

@SeeMoreDigital:

Did you see my PM to you regarding obtaining the DivX 4.x player certification specs?

[SeeMoreDigital]

@SeeMoreDigital:

Did you see my PM to you regarding obtaining the DivX 4.x player certification specs?According to your PM one of your guys has an Toshiba SC-4000 which is fitted with an Zoran Vaddis 966 chipset. Which should offer .MP4 container support too

I'll dig out one of my "720(854)x480_Anamorphic_Test_Card.avi" samples for you guys to try. If the Toshiba can't display my .AVI sample correctly, it's game over!

[MrVideo]

According to your PM one of your guys has an Toshiba SC-4000 which is fitted with an Zoran Vaddis 966 chipset. Which should offer .MP4 container support too

I'll have to look into that.

I'll dig out one of my "720(854)x480_Anamorphic_Test_Card.avi" samples for you guys to try. If the Toshiba can't display my .AVI sample correctly, it's game over!

One piece of depressing info that came from one of the users is that a 352x240 DivX/AVI video is displayed in the center of the screen. It is not rescaled to fill the screen, with letterboxing.

[MrVideo]

I have a simple question about the resolution sizing for DivX. Is it mod4, mod8 or mod16?

[SeeMoreDigital]

As mentioned earlier. Here's a link to a couple of 720x480 anamorphic test cards for you to try: http://www.mediafire.com/?3u3bkpssb72l7ze


Cheers

[SeeMoreDigital]

I have a simple question about the resolution sizing for DivX. Is it mod4, mod8 or mod16?
It's mod-16 ;)

[MrVideo]

It's mod-16 ;)

OK. According to one of the people involved, DivX videos have been encoded with a vertical height of 404, which is not mod16. How can that be?

My main work is HD using x264, as I personally changed to x264 quite a while ago. But, for some others who can't deal with HD, their mode of playback if DivX players.

Downloading the test cards shortly.

[MrVideo]

As mentioned earlier. Here's a link to a couple of 720x480 anamorphic test cards for you to try

OK, one file is anamorphic and the other 4:3.

Based on the above posts, the DivX DVD player shouldn't be able to letterbox the 16:9 version. At most, all it will do is fill the 4:3 screen.

[SeeMoreDigital]

OK. According to one of the people involved, DivX videos have been encoded with a vertical height of 404, which is not mod16. How can that be?

Unfortunately alot of encoding applications allow people to generate MPEG-4 SP/ASP encodes at "any old" mod value :devil:

[MrVideo]

According to your PM one of your guys has an Toshiba SC-4000 which is fitted with an Zoran Vaddis 966 chipset. Which should offer .MP4 container support too

The Toshiba SD-4000KU2 appears to display anamorphic video correctly on the screen (letterboxed), but the MP3 audio plays out-of-sync and slightly distorted. But, I'm thinking it is because the video is 59.94 fps, as the source is 720p59.94.

I'm having him check out a video, 720x400 square pixel, that is 23.976 fps.

[MrVideo]

I'm having him check out a video, 720x400 square pixel, that is 23.976 fps.

The video played just fine, including the audio. Next up is a test for anamorphic widescreen 720x480. Also, the XviD encoder was used.

[kalehrl]

Why don't you just change the encoding parameters to suit "normal" dvd/xvid player instead of choosing a player which plays files encoded with some "strange" settings?
Maybe I'm missing something here.

[SeeMoreDigital]

The video played just fine, including the audio. Next up is a test for anamorphic widescreen 720x480. Also, the XviD encoder was used.
Well, if the 720x480 16:9 and 4:3 anamorphic samples I gave you did not work with the Toshiba. No MPEG-4 SP/ASP .AVI contained encode will...

[MrVideo]

Well, if the 720x480 16:9 and 4:3 anamorphic samples I gave you did not work with the Toshiba. No MPEG-4 SP/ASP .AVI contained encode will...

I have not heard a response from him about the test files. Don't know why. I will get him to play those.

720x480 anamorphic 16:9 does not play letterboxed. It plays as if the video was 4:3, i.e., does nothing but send it out the composite video.

A 720x400 square pixel encoding plays fine.

[MrVideo]

Why don't you just change the encoding parameters to suit "normal" dvd/xvid player instead of choosing a player which plays files encoded with some "strange" settings?
Maybe I'm missing something here.

Who said the settings are strange. IMHO, the DivX certification is a mess. The fact that it won't play a 720x480 anamorphic 16:9 video correctly is fubar. DVDs have been that way for ages and yet, something "new" takes steps backwards.

And just what is normal? It is easy to find specs on encoding for DVDs, but pretty much impossible for DivX. And what settings might those be? The program, HDConvertToX, has lots of settings, including anamorphic.

[kalehrl]

If anamorphic is causing problems, don't use it.
It advisable to use square pixels when encoding in xvid and I think the same goes for divx.
I've been doing backups of my DVDs and satellite dvb-s recordings with AutoGK and sometimes with MeGUI and never have I had any troubles with playback on a standalone device - Philips dvp3260.
AutoGK always uses square pixels but MeGUI has also anamorphic function but, for standalone compatibility, it is not recommended when encoding in xvid.

[manolito]

@MrVideo

The fact that it won't play a 720x480 anamorphic 16:9 video correctly is fubar. DVDs have been that way for ages and yet, something "new" takes steps backwards.

You really have to take into account why the DivX company created this "Home Theater" profile in the past. They had to use the least common denominator to ensure compatibility with each and every standalone which had the DivX logo slapped on the front panel. To achieve this they gladly sacrificed a lot of possible options and features which the encoder offered.

To the best of my knowledge standalone players can either have the core "DivX" logo or the "DivX Ultra" logo. DivX Ultra supports anamorphic, menus, chapters and subtitles. But you can only author such a file using their own "DivXAuthor" software or TMPGenc Authoring Works.

For full compatibility with all DivX capable standalones I recommend to use the settings which their own "DivX Converter" uses. Those are:

1. Use the "Home Theater" profile

2. Square Pixels. Do not encode anamorphic.

3. Always deinterlace the source.

4. 2-pass ABR encoding. Do not use quality based encoding.

5. Audio should be MP3 CBR. Do not use VBR.
(AC3 is also allowed, but some standalones do not like it)


Cheers
manolito

[SeeMoreDigital]

MPEG-4 SP/ASP hardware player history lesson...

Given that DivX developed their first player "Certification" long before "aspect ratio signalling" (ARS) detection was conceived, there was no requirement for player manufacturers to include support for it.

Indeed, SigmaDesigns A/V decoding chip-sets included ARS detection support for MPEG-4 SP/ASP streams placed within the .MP4 container, a year or so before adding support for MPEG-4 SP/ASP streams placed the .AVI container!

Hardware player manufacturers who sold players based around MediaTek's MT1389xx A/V decoding chip-set(s) offered better ARS support for .AVI contained files than any other A/V decoding chip-set manufacturer.

Although, many A/V decoding "chip-set" manufacturers developed chip-sets that supported ARS detection for MPEG-4 SP/ASP streams placed within the .AVI container, not all "player" manufacturers could be bothered to enable it. And there's no-way they ever will now!

Xvid, offered the ability to generate MPEG-4 SP/ASP streams with ARS "years" before DivX.

Xvid also created a direct-show decoder filter capable of decoding MPEG-4 SP/ASP streams with ARS "years" before DivX.


Cheers

[MrVideo]

If anamorphic is causing problems, don't use it.


Because it doesn't work, I'm not.

[MrVideo]

For full compatibility with all DivX capable standalones I recommend to use the settings which their own "DivX Converter" uses. Those are:

1. Use the "Home Theater" profile

HDConvertToX doesn't have such an option, at least not that I've found. They have a "Stand Alone Player" compatibility mode, which I use. I also use the XviD encoder, as I seem to not have DivX installed. Fine by me.

2. Square Pixels. Do not encode anamorphic.

Ya, doing that now (720x400 for 16:9 material).

3. Always deinterlace the source.

That doesn't make sense for pure video material, as it has to be interlaced when sent out the composite video outputs. A moot point in a majority of the cases anyway, as the source is 720p23.976 H.264 MKV.

4. 2-pass ABR encoding. Do not use quality based encoding.

1300 kbps is the manual bitrate that I use.

5. Audio should be MP3 CBR. Do not use VBR.

192 kbps MP3 CBR

[MrVideo]

MPEG-4 SP/ASP hardware player history lesson...

I appreciate the info. Thanks.

[Jawor]

That doesn't make sense for pure video material, as it has to be interlaced when sent out the composite video outputs.
The “DivX Home Theater” profile supports interlacing, but...

1. It does not allow B-VOPs together with interlacing.
2. To retain the interlacing we'd have to keep the vertical resolution (576/480). Since the maximum horizontal resolution for “PAL” material is 720, we'll have a distorted AR with such clips (due to lack of widespread support for anamorphic signaling). Sure, we can create interlaced clips using other resolutions (by smart-bobbing before resizing and re-interlacing the clip after resizing), but does that really make sense? ;)
3. Some players seem to have issues with interlaced MPEG-4 despite being DivX-certified. E.g. my Philips DVP3142/12 (also based on the Zoran Vaddis 966 chipset) doesn't like TFF with 720x576 @ 25 FPS, but with 720x480 @ 29.97 FPS it works just fine.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Personally speaking...

Given the relative low cost of todays "high-def" capable network media players along with their ability to play just about any "popular" audio, video and container format. I'm of the opinion it's not worth the effort trying to find specific encoding options to accommodate these "low spec/weak" players!

[MrVideo]

As a result of all this, only 23.976 progressive material will be converted.

[kurkosdr]

I also believe that the issue is with SUPER, but have no proof one way or the other.

Divx avi clips made with SUPER don't play in my player too (toshiba 19DV615DG). When I select the clip, the screen goes black, as if it's about to start playing, but nothing happens. So, just use some other program to make Divx avi files.

The converter I use is Divx Plus Converter (yes, the one from Divx Inc). The real problem with other converters is that they are not really Divx-compatible. If you encode using high quality settings (like me), they are almost certainly going to produce a bitrate spike that exceeds 4096Kbps for more than one second, thus causing some players to freeze or skip.

Even AutoGK, which has compatibility profiles for the ESS and MTK chipsets, if you select "100%" in the "target quality" setting, it tells you that "some compatibility parameterers are going to be ignored".

Of course, if you encode using low bitrates (quantizer 4 or just fitting a 2hour movie in 1CD/2CD), then this problem doesn't show itself, so you may also use AutoGK.

[Ghitulescu]

The converter I use is Divx Plus Converter (yes, the one from Divx Inc). The real problem with other converters is that they are not really Divx-compatible. If you encode using high quality settings (like me), they are almost certainly going to produce a bitrate spike that exceeds 4096Kbps for more than one second, thus causing some players to freeze or skip.

Since DivX Networks (now DivX inc) licences the divx use, format and logo for standalones, it's no wonder their encodes work the best on them. :p:p:p

[Jawor]

DivX Networks (now DivX inc)

Now a part of Macrovision :p

The real problem with other converters is that they are not really Divx-compatible. If you encode using high quality settings (like me), they are almost certainly going to produce a bitrate spike that exceeds 4096Kbps for more than one second, thus causing some players to freeze or skip.
Using VBV in Xvid (which, BTW, is enabled by default in its VfW interface for two-pass encodes ;) ) should help here. Actually, Xvid.org's own Xvid Home profile uses the same VBV values that are specified in DivX Home Theater (so do celtic_druid's MTK PAL / MTK NTSC profiles and my Generic Standalone profile).

[Ghitulescu]

Now a part of Macrovision :p

I thought part of Sonic Solutions. Good to know.

[Jawor]

I thought part of Sonic Solutions. Good to know.
Rovi Corp (Macrovision) bought Sonic Solutions and DivX with it (http://www.rovicorp.com/pl/14990.htm).

(Sorry for drifting a bit off-topic...)

[kurkosdr]

Using VBV in Xvid (which, BTW, is enabled by default in its VfW interface for two-pass encodes ;) ) should help here. Actually, Xvid.org's own Xvid Home profile uses the same VBV values that are specified in DivX Home Theater (so do celtic_druid's MTK PAL / MTK NTSC profiles and my Generic Standalone profile).
If there was an easy GUI tool that would allow to use the Xvid Home profile, it would be good. But neither AutoGK nor Avidemux have this option. They have the usual quantizer / size settings that produce files with the usual 4096Kbps for more that a second spikes, for certain quality settings.

Here is how that GUI tool should work:
1. Import file
2. Click "Xvid Home"
3. Select quality/size (within the xvid home restrictions)
4. Click "encode"

[hello_hello]

If there was an easy GUI tool that would allow to use the Xvid Home profile, it would be good. But neither AutoGK nor Avidemux have this option. They have the usual quantizer / size settings that produce files with the usual 4096Kbps for more that a second spikes, for certain quality settings.

From AutoGK's help file, regarding the hidden standalone compatibility options (Ctrl+F9):

ESS-based standalones. For both XviD and DivX codecs this option also enables Home Theatre profile which is a part of DivX certification for hardware devices and which enables control over VBV buffer.
MTK/Sigma based standalones. The difference to the previous option is only usage of custom matrices for XviD. VBV buffer control (in the form of HT profiles) is enabled as well by this setting.

Pretty much every AVI I've ever produced using AutoGK has been encoded with the ESS standalone option enabled to ensure maximum compatibility. I've owned and used many DivX DVD players over the years and not once have any of them had any problem playing my AutoGK, XviD encodes. I can't say the same for other peoples encodes.

[kurkosdr]

ESS-based standalones. For both XviD and DivX codecs this option also enables Home Theatre profile which is a part of DivX certification for hardware devices and which enables control over VBV buffer.

Yes, but I think (not sure) that if you set the quality percentage a bit high, AutoGk will show a warning message that it will ignore some standalone compatiblity options. This could mean that Home Theater will NOT be strictly followed anymore. But that's just what i think.

[hello_hello]

Since DivX Networks (now DivX inc) licences the divx use, format and logo for standalones, it's no wonder their encodes work the best on them.

They don't.
As long as the video stream is encoded using the appropriate restrictions why would the decoder care which encoder was used to create it? Aside from the fourcc info, which might stop some standalone devices from even trying to play the video, how would it even know?
I've never had a problem playing a DivX compliant XviD encode on a DivX certified player, ever. See my previous post.

[hello_hello]

Yes, but I think (not sure) that if you set the quality percentage a bit high, AutoGk will show a warning message that it will ignore some standalone compatiblity options. This could mean that Home Theater will NOT be strictly followed anymore. But that's just what i think.

Sorry, I may have misunderstood your problem a little.
The warning of options being ignored does in fact refer to the VBV buffer control, but as far as I'm aware that's a limitation of the XviD (and probably DivX) encoders. They can only control the VBV buffer when encoding using 2 passes. It wouldn't matter which GUI you used.
As much as it pains me to do so, I do generally use 2 pass encoding for that very reason. Chances are the majority of encodes wouldn't have bitrate peaks which would cause problems, but I usually use 2 pass encoding just to be sure.

[hello_hello]

I just opened the Xvid encoder's configuration and had a look around. Even the appropriate setting for the encoder is labelled "Video Buffer Verifier - used in Two-Pass mode"

[Jawor]

Even the appropriate setting for the encoder is labelled "Video Buffer Verifier - used in Two-Pass mode"

Yes, Xvid can use VBV only when encoding in two passes.

But it looks like DivX can do it also in constant quantizer mode (that would mean the specified target quantizer is overridden for sections that violate VBV requirements).

[kurkosdr]

Yes, Xvid can use VBV only when encoding in two passes.
Can anyone post the settings I need to make to AutoGK to achieve an 100% Divx-compatible encode (preferably in the best possible quality)? How do I enable two pass encoding in AutoGK, plus any other things I may need to chance.

[Ghitulescu]

They don't.
As long as the video stream is encoded using the appropriate restrictions why would the decoder care which encoder was used to create it? Aside from the fourcc info, which might stop some standalone devices from even trying to play the video, how would it even know?
I've never had a problem playing a DivX compliant XviD encode on a DivX certified player, ever. See my previous post.

I can't contest your assumptions as I do not have Divx videos. However, once a company produces and licences both the hardware specs and the encoder/codec, and this company is well known monopolist [supporter] I wouldn't be surprised to see a success rate of 100% for their videos vs. less than 100% for competitors.
It's like MS-DOS vs. DR-DOS, or Netscape vs. IExplorer. Both of them fulfilled the public specs laid out by MS, yet some applications couldn't work on DR-DOS or Netscape.

[Jawor]

OK, they were always saying that they're certifying hardware for “DivX playback”, not “MPEG-4 playback”. But when DXN nailed down the specs for their “Certified” profiles, capabilities of already existing hardware were the real limitation (some features of their then-current codec, like Qpel and 1wp-GMC, had to be omitted). Besides, by not introducing any proprietary extensions to MPEG-4 SP/ASP (not counting Packed Bitstream), DXN took advantage of the “network effect” (already then, Xvid was more popular than DivX and that popularity must have given a major boost in sales of MPEG-4-capable hardware). The hardware certification program generated substantial income for DXN while their software products (“DivX Pro”, old “Dr. DivX” and that spectacular failure called “MasterMind” or sth like that) were quickly falling into obscurity ;)

Even some encodes generated with DivX may prove incompatible with their “Certified” hardware due to simple bugs in (some older versions of) DivX's VfW GUI (for example, I remember a DivX version that allowed the usage of MPEG quantization in profiles that don't support it).

[Ghitulescu]

... DXN took advantage of the “network effect” (already then, Xvid was more popular than DivX and that popularity must have given a major boost in sales of MPEG-4-capable hardware) ...

Exactly my point - people converting DVDs to Divx (and especially those that didn't do this themselves :p) helped DXN earn a lot of money. As a corollary, they also made people not converting pay more for features they don't need, but are trendy.

[kurkosdr]

I can't contest your assumptions as I do not have Divx videos. However, once a company produces and licences both the hardware specs and the encoder/codec, and this company is well known monopolist [supporter] I wouldn't be surprised to see a success rate of 100% for their videos vs. less than 100% for competitors.

Divx Inc never intended their Divx-certified players to only play videos made with Divx Inc software (unlike Microsoft with WMV, which does want WMV files to only be generated by MS software) because their format would fade into obscurity.

Instead Divx Inc keeps the basic specs open, but hides extensions like the DVD-like menus and the rest. That way, they make money from device certifications (since only they know all the parts of the format) and professional authoring software they sell, but this doesn't stop people from encoding videos for their certified devices.

Divx Home Theater specs have been known for quite a while (and been implemented by xvid home profile), and Divx Inc also have instructions in their site on how to use x264 to produce a Divx Plus HD compatible file.

The problem is caused by lack of interest by the AutoGK and the avidemux folks, otherwise they would have a "force xvid home" button in their programs.

Can anyone post the settings i need to make to AutoGK to achieve a 100% compatible Divx Home Theater/Xvid Home clip?

[Jawor]

Divx Inc never intended their Divx-certified players to only play videos made with Divx Inc software because their format would fade into obscurity.
Just like the aforementioned WMA/WMV and Nero Digital did :p

DivX's DMF container isn't really “closed” (the DMF SDK was released to the public) and yet its “extended” features are not supported by anything except certified hardware and the DivX Plus Player (DXN's DirectShow filter for XSubs was discontinued... and AFAIR it worked only on XP). Sure, we can create XSub subtitles (the most successful part of DMF) with a number of third-party freeware tools, but playback is a different matter (did anyone manage to do it on Linux? ;) ). Freeware/OSS programmers were not willing to promote something proprietary (even if it's relatively “open”), especially for DXN (keeping in mind the OpenDivX/encore2 affair). The multi-audio part of DMF works everywhere, 'cause it was already supported by some AVI muxers (like VDM) and splitters.

Look at Nero Digital... Using MP4 instead of AVI and AAC instead of MP3 (with MPEG-4 SP/ASP video) simply killed their whole certification program (besides, “DivX” was already a household name and almost nobody heard of Nero Digital). A great example of a missed opportunity for using the network effect :p It was like picking a fight with the neighborhood's strongest bully...

[kurkosdr]

(did anyone manage to do it on Linux? ;).
Use VLC (latest version). It supports XSUBs. In fact, support for XSUBs existed in VLC for quite a while using an old demuxer. But then Videolan moved to a new demuxer and forgot to port the XSUB decoding feature, and was only ported very recently. Just don't ask for DVD-like menus.

Now, can we get back on topic of how to produce divx compatible encodes using non -Divx Inc programs?

[Jawor]

How do I enable two pass encoding in AutoGK, plus any other things I may need to chance.
According to the manual (http://www.autogk.me.uk/modules.php?name=TutorialEN), it is sufficient to check Enable standalone support and ESS under “Hidden Options” and then select a target size (instead of target quality) to force two-pass encoding (that makes perfect sense, since Xvid uses VBV only in two-pass mode and two passes are required to hit a target size).

Target quality basically means “single-pass constant quantizer encoding”, so no wonder that the bitrate can spike above the “DivX Home Theater” limit.

[hello_hello]

I can't contest your assumptions as I do not have Divx videos.

I don't own any aeroplanes but I don't let that stop me logging into aviation forums and offering my opinion either.

However, once a company produces and licences both the hardware specs and the encoder/codec, and this company is well known monopolist [supporter] I wouldn't be surprised to see a success rate of 100% for their videos vs. less than 100% for competitors.

It doesn't surprise me you'd think that without offering anything but mere speculation. It's mpeg4 video. Either the decoder can decode it or it can't.
All DivX capable DVD players aren't created equal, they've just got to comply with the DivX specification (probably the home theatre profile). If they can handle higher bitrates, great. If they're not bothered by global motion compensation, yippeee. If they can handle 27 consecutive BVOP's, terrific. If they laugh in the face of custom matrices, fine. If they'll decode anamorphic video with the correct aspect ratio, it's party time.
But if a DVD player is DivX certified and if it's guaranteed to play any mpeg4 video which is encoded within certain limitations, usually a DivX profile such as home theatre, then as long as you restrict the encoder to those home theatre settings, the decoder should be able to decode it. If you don't know exactly what your player can decode then you're 100% safe sticking to the basic home theatre profile. If you don't stick to the home theatre profile restrictions then it doesn't matter which encoder you use in respect to whether your player will decode it.

It's like MS-DOS vs. DR-DOS, or Netscape vs. IExplorer. Both of them fulfilled the public specs laid out by MS, yet some applications couldn't work on DR-DOS or Netscape.

It's nothing like that. Microsoft deliberately went out of their way to sabatage other versions of DOS and if Netscape didn't render properly it's probably because the page used proprietary Microsoft IE code. There's nothing to suggest DivX have ever tried similar tactics.

[hello_hello]

Exactly my point - people converting DVDs to Divx (and especially those that didn't do this themselves :p) helped DXN earn a lot of money. As a corollary, they also made people not converting pay more for features they don't need, but are trendy.

How that was your point, is beyond me.

[hello_hello]

Yes, Xvid can use VBV only when encoding in two passes.

But it looks like DivX can do it also in constant quantizer mode (that would mean the specified target quantizer is overridden for sections that violate VBV requirements).

If you're correct, then it's disappointing someone hasn't taught XviD to do that.
It still doesn't change my earlier argument of all compliant encodes being playable on all DivX certified players, even if it's easier using the DivX encoder. Maybe that's the solution for kurkosdr if he doesn't want to do 2 pass encoding with XviD.


Now, can we get back on topic of how to produce divx compatible encodes using non -Divx Inc programs?

I guess... as long as those who don't encode refrain from interrupting the thread with off-topic speculation. ;)

I answered your question in detail in the AutoGK thread. Although Jawor seems to think the DivX encoder can control VBV while running single pass encoding. If that's correct, then maybe DivX is your answer, or it's 2 pass encoding with XviD.

I haven't used the DivX encoder in years. Anyone know if there's any major quality differences compared to Xvid?

[Jawor]

Although Jawor seems to think the DivX encoder can control VBV while running single pass encoding. If that's correct, then maybe DivX is your answer, or it's 2 pass encoding with XviD.
A quick test confirmed my suspicions - VBV can be used by DivX in constant quantizer mode (we just have to select the profile). AVINaptic clearly shows that in my test clip VBV values for the selected profile are respected (and quantizers were simply increased where it was necessary to satisfy VBV requirements).

I haven't used the DivX encoder in years. Anyone know if there's any major quality differences compared to Xvid?
The quality difference isn't as huge as it was many years ago, but Xvid can still beat DivX, even when using the feature-restricted “DivX HT” profile (and the slowest motion search algorithms in both codecs). Supposedly DivX's multithreading scales much better than Xvid's on 4+ cores... I can't test that, I've got only 2 :mad:

[kurkosdr]

I was hoping that Xvid would have a "two pass constant quantizer" (aka "two pass set quality percentage") mode, but since it doesn't i ll go with two pass target size.

[Jawor]

The two-pass mode's goal is to reach constant quality at the specified target size and within VBV constraints. Quantizers throughout the movie will be similar (the codec will have to increase them only for sections that otherwise would violate VBV constraints).

[kurkosdr]

Looks like youtube beat us: I found this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKHX8FGKFgw) and it's quite useful (just set the bitrate to 4000)

[Jawor]

Selecting the appropriate profile in Xvid's VfW GUI will enforce VBV restrictions just as well, but much faster ;) Sure, the capability of using user-specified VBV values can be handy sometimes (that's why I included it the VfW GUI of my Xvid builds), but usually that's too much hassle (almost all built-in profiles use VBV values from “DivX Home Theater” anyway)...

[Chetwood]

Given the relative low cost of todays "high-def" capable network media players along with their ability to play just about any audio, video and container format.
If only! The WDTV Live e.g. has several subtitle bugs (like PGS in m2ts but not in mkv, trasparent outline, etc.) and does not support all losless audio formats.

It's like MS-DOS vs. DR-DOS, or Netscape vs. IExplorer.
As already said it's not like that at all. M$ used asshole underhand tactics to deliberately cripple a competitor's product and got convicted for it (not that it helped those competitiors). Divx seems to have more ethical standards.

Now, can we get back on topic of how to produce divx compatible encodes using non -Divx Inc programs?
So were Staxrip and Handbrake already tested in that regard?

[SeeMoreDigital]

If only! The WDTV Live e.g. has several subtitle bugs (like PGS in m2ts but not in mkv, trasparent outline, etc.) and does not support all losless audio formats.
You're moving the goal posts quite a bit wider now... You don't get support for these with a "disc spinning" DivX compatible stand-alone either!

EDIT: Sufficed to say, as with any hardware playback device, it's up-to the end-user to generate encodes that will play in-accordance with the hardware players specification.

[hello_hello]

Looks like youtube beat us: I found this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKHX8FGKFgw) and it's quite useful (just set the bitrate to 4000)

I can't speak for every XviD build but the version which comes with AutoGK automatically provides the appropriate VBV values according to the profile you select and doesn't seem to let you change them anyway.
The main difference I can see between following the video's instructions and encoding with AutoGK is you're selecting the target bitrate rather than the target file size, but it's still 2 pass encoding only you're guessing as to what the quality will be.

The video suggests using Average Bitrate 2 Pass encoding while setting the bitrate to 1500 or 2000. Is that really any different to 2 pass encoding while selecting the file size except you're selecting it in a different way? Seems to me like it's a method which also predetermines the quality, while potentially wasting a lot of bits or reducing the quality through restricting it too much.

I've got a bunch of AVIs on my hard drive waiting to be burned. The largest has a bitrate of around 1800 while the smallest has a bitrate of 730, yet they were both encoded to the same quality setting (AutoGK's 75%).

One thing I've never understood is how AutoGK determines the quality after running a compression test or after it's run the first pass. I gather 75% = Q2.7 but I don't know how the quality is determined. I assume the info is obtained from XviD's first pass log, I just don't know how.
Likewise I've never understood why AutoGK is the only GUI I've ever come across which supplies that info. Why is it not standard for a GUI to run a first pass according to your settings then tell you what the quality will be? I guess the same question would apply to x264 encoding as well.

Thinking about it a bit more (and sorry for wandering off topic a bit) why is it not possible to run a 2 pass encode at a selected quality rather than file size or bitrate?
It's my understanding XviD runs it's first pass using Q2 and then adjusts the bitrate etc for the second pass according to the selected file size. If that's correct, why can't it also make adjustments to achieve a selected quality?
I understand as a general rule it'd probably be pointless (might as well just run a single pass encode at a selected quality) but when it comes to VBV control you're forced to run 2 passes, so being able to do so while simply selecting the final quality rather than guessing at a file size would be nice.
Or even the ability to manually calculate the desired quality/file size based on the stats from the first pass, then use the calculated file size for the second pass to achieve the desired quality. Is that possible?

[kurkosdr]

So were Staxrip and Handbrake already tested in that regard?

Handbrake dropped avi support in their latest versions for no good reason whatsoever (or according to the maintainer's "because avi support makes the code too complicated"). And they explicitly stated it's not coming back. Should I try version 0.9.4 from oldversion.com?

I will try staxrip.

[manolito]

Handbrake dropped avi support in their latest versions for no good reason whatsoever (or according to the maintainer's "because avi support makes the code too complicated"). And they explicitly stated it's not coming back. Should I try version 0.9.4 from oldversion.com?

I will try staxrip.

You would have to go back to Handbrake 0.9.3 to get avi support back...:devil:
And AFAIK the developers stated some more reasons why they dropped avi support for good (the avi format is generally deprecated, their avi muxer was buggy and did not support large avi files and so on...)

But Staxrip is a really good alternatve IMO. First of all you have the choice between XviD and DivX. It comes with templates for both codecs, but you would have to tweak these templates a little (e.g. it defaults to MP3 VBR for audio which is problematic). I also found that it is no problem to use a different version of XviD instead of the version which comes with Staxrip (I prefer Celtic Druid's compiles over Koepi's).

Plus it automates your encodes in terms of cropping and optionally resizing for square pixels. You also can choose between different resizers and deinterlacers. And what I like most is that unlike many competitors it includes all the helper software, no chasing the net to download and install all the needed helper apps. (In the case of Nero AAC I am not so sure how legal it is to include it, but it certainly made my life a little easier.) Too bad that right now it looks like it is not maintained any more...:(


Another option would be DivXAuthor from the DivX company itself. Right now they offer a 50% discount on all their software, which means that I can buy it for 8 EUR here in Germany.

This app really originates from TMPGEnc DVD Author. It authors DivX Ultra compatible files (supports menues, chapters and anamorphic), but you can of course turn these features off and specify square pixels. It has not been updated since 2007, so the encoder is a little out of date. But it basically does what it is supposed to do, and at least for me it has always produced files which play on every standalone I have access to.


Cheers
manolito

[kurkosdr]

Since DivX Networks (now DivX inc) licences the divx use, format and logo for standalones, it's no wonder their encodes work the best on them. :p:p:p

Nah, I don't think the reason non-Divx Inc tools produce excessive bitrate spikes is because of lack of documentation (the bitrates and settings to make a Divx-compatible avi file are well known). More like lack of interest by Xvid. Most non-Divx Inc tools use Xvid, which can't stay within the required bitrates in one pass mode (only in two pass mode), and most tools just use the one pass mode (faster) and just don't care about the bitrate spikes. I now switched to Avidemux, with Xvid as the codec, with "Average bitrate (two pass)" set accordingly (see video above).
I use Divx Plus Converter only for fast encodings when I don't care about the quality of a particular video file.

[kurkosdr]

I can't speak for every XviD build but the version which comes with AutoGK automatically provides the appropriate VBV values according to the profile you select and doesn't seem to let you change them anyway. The main d

Then why AutoGK throws a warning that some standalone compatibility options will be ignored if you set it to "target quality"? If it's not the bitrate, which compatibility options are ignored?

Also, if AutoGK's "target quality" mode uses Xvid's constast quantizer (one pass), how can Xvid keep within the required bitrates? (Xvid can't do that in one pass modes, it doesn't even have VBV options for one pass mode)

[Chetwood]

AutoGK uses a non-standard matrix when standalone compatibilty isn't checked.

[kurkosdr]

AutoGK uses a non-standard matrix when standalone compatibilty isn't checked.

This is not the problem. The problem is that if I set the standalone compatibility to ESS (or MTK, i prefer ESS), and then set it to "target quality", and before i even set the target quality, AutoGK throws a message that some standalone compatibility options will be ignored. No mention what those options are, but if "target quality" is indeed using Xvid's "constant quantizer" mode (one pass), I smell it's the bitrate limits that are ignored.

[nixo]

You'd be right. VBV restrictions are ignored in constant quantizer mode – which is what AutoGK uses. This is explicitly stated under 'Level' in the encoder configuration.

If an encode absolutely must play on a standalone, it's either 2 passes or Divx.

--
Nikolaj