VP6 And Rv9.

[iwod]

Looks like i have been missing quite a bit. The latest VP6 in the Harry Potter tralier Test seems to win every codec hands down.
Even once the 380kbps RV9 = Perfect Sirber is stating to change his mind :D

Here is a few things that i like to found out from those who have tested Vp6, and Rv9. ( I am using a laptop and to tell you the truth. Divx and RV9 EHQ encoding manage to burn my Motherboard once already. I can not afford to do anymore encoding testing. )

What i like to know is

When Endoing at the Highest Quality ( EHQ ) RV9 and VP6. How long does each one take?

What are the resources for decoding? ( While The advantage of RV9 EHQ is that it increase Quality without increase decoding power. And Vp6, the higher the PP the higher the decoding power.)

thanks.

[Sirber]

It's true I got interrested in VP6 and made some tests, but I found VP6 more blury than RV9 for movies. I don't know why... but it adds details in the middle of a scene:confused:

[DevilsChild]

From my experience, RV9 in two passes with highest EHQ takes about the same time to encode as VP6 with two passes, best quality. This is consistent with Doom9's recent codec comparison where the two codecs showed nearly identical encoding speeds (averaged over two passes). Haven't had any trouble with post-processing in VP6, though some have complained about "film-effect" being on by default.

As for quality, there is no doubt in my mind that VP6 is at least the equal of any other codec. It's astonishingly good at low bitrates. I often take a look at the AVI produced in the first pass with VP6 and am always amazed at the quality. DivX or XviD will always look horrible at such low bitrates.

[Sirber]

When VP6 will be able to produce a contant quality (2-pass) clip, it will be able to compete more against other codecs. IMHO VP6 isn't ready for production.

[Sigmatador]

sirber, configure the vp6 decoder on "best psnr" i hope this is what cause you to see things blurry.