Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > New and alternative video codecs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 9th February 2011, 00:36   #1  |  Link
wolfgangbeyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 8
Why most encoders in ffdshow have been removed?

Hi,

obviously in Nov. or Dec. 2010 nearly all encoders in ffdshow have been removed. Is there any reason for that?
__________________
Wolfgang Beyer
www.wolfgangbeyer.de
wolfgangbeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2011, 03:48   #2  |  Link
Midzuki
Unavailable
 
Midzuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: offline
Posts: 1,388
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...29#post1467129
Midzuki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2011, 23:44   #3  |  Link
wolfgangbeyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 8
Hi Midzuki,

I'm not very happy about that and I think most ordinary users too. Where can I find recommedations for the said better solutions for encoding? I don’t think that any ordinary user who casually used ffdshow so far for encoding also has the time to search the monster thread "ffdshow tryouts project: Discussion & Development" to find and understand the relevant discussion in Dec. 2010. How should we encode in the future XviD, DivX, H.264 and others? I installed ffdshow because I heard that installing several codec packages could lead to conflicts between them, and having all of them integrated in ffdshow would solve this problem. Now I have to care about this problem again? If there is no answer about this question which I am able to understand in less than 10 minutes I don’t see any reason to install any ffdsow version above ffdshow_rev3572_20100913_clsid.exe, which seems to be the last available version with all encorders (which I found out after a search of I forgot how much time). Problems with video on PC seem to be a never ending story for me. I never wanted to become a video expert ...
__________________
Wolfgang Beyer
www.wolfgangbeyer.de
wolfgangbeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2011, 13:45   #4  |  Link
nurbs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,455
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgangbeyer View Post
How should we encode in the future XviD, DivX, H.264 and others?
With XviD, Divx, x264 (or x264vfw).

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgangbeyer View Post
I installed ffdshow because I heard that installing several codec packages could lead to conflicts between them, and having all of them integrated in ffdshow would solve this problem.
Codec packs can cause conflicts, but by not using packs and only installing the encoders you need you are unlikely to run into trouble.
nurbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2011, 13:55   #5  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,499
Ideally there should be one codec for one format. Problems occur mainly when a codec conflicts with another one, either there are more than one codec for one format, or a codec that can do multiple formats interferes with another [legitimate] one.

Using less formats on a particular PC and installing only the needed codecs is the key to a trouble-free work.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2011, 17:24   #6  |  Link
wolfgangbeyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by nurbs View Post
With XviD, Divx, x264 (or x264vfw).
For x264 the encoder seems to be offered separately but in case of XviD and DivX the decoders obviously are installed too. What about conflicts with the corresponding ffdshow decoders according to:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghitulescu View Post
Problems occur mainly when a codec conflicts with another one, either there are more than one codec for one format, ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midzuki View Post
Besides, if you really need/miss the options for Xvid, WMV9, H264 and Theora , you still can copy the xvidcore, ff_wmv9, ff_x264 and ff_theora DLLs to the ffdshow folder.
That is good to know.
__________________
Wolfgang Beyer
www.wolfgangbeyer.de
wolfgangbeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th February 2011, 09:26   #7  |  Link
andrixnet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgangbeyer View Post
I'm not very happy about that and I think most ordinary users too.

I donít see any reason to install any ffdsow version above ffdshow_rev3572_20100913_clsid.exe, which seems to be the last available version with all encorders
The one great thing about ffdshow is the fact that offered a great variaty of decoders and encoders all in one package, while not being a codec-pack, but a single entity.
andrixnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th February 2011, 09:32   #8  |  Link
andrixnet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5
Are there any ffdshow builds other then clsid newer then ffdshow_rev3572_20100913 that do contain the full encoding capabilities of rev3572 and earlier?
andrixnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th February 2011, 10:31   #9  |  Link
Sharc
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,240
http://www.xvidvideo.ru/ffdshow-tryo...oject-x86-x64/
Sharc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th February 2011, 15:25   #10  |  Link
clsid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,653
ffdshow's decoder has a very high merit and will get used instead of any other decoders that may be installed (basically just Xvid, as DivX is redundant anyway).
clsid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2011, 13:26   #11  |  Link
pandy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,030
@Sharc - i believe that this version also strip off all other codec's
pandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2011, 11:36   #12  |  Link
andrixnet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5
Indeed they are removed from those builds as well.

I still fail to understand the reason behind this.
I don't see ffmpeg dropping encoders because separate packages exist.
Yes, ffmpeg compiles support for various formats using separate libraries. But in the end it's one encoding and decoding package that does it all.
andrixnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd February 2011, 11:47   #13  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 8,850
The codecs that were removed were outdated, broken or incomplete. Much better alternatives exist all around. No-one was willing to update or fix the existing ones, so they were removed.

I don't get the problem here. You want a h264 encoder? Well install the x264 VfW codec, and don't use the half-broken and outdated ffdshow version. Same goes for the other codecs, of course. The only reason i can come up with that this is so bad for you is lazyness - and thats no reason in itself.

In the end, its the decision of the developers anyway. You don't pay them, most of you don't even thank them, but if they do something you don't like, you get noisy and annoying. A great world that is open source.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders

Last edited by nevcairiel; 22nd February 2011 at 11:50.
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2011, 16:48   #14  |  Link
andrixnet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
The codecs that were removed were outdated, broken or incomplete. Much better alternatives exist all around. No-one was willing to update or fix the existing ones, so they were removed.
ffmpeg -codecs
List is neither tiny, nor the encoders outdated. And yes, some of them are based on external libraries that are the base for their respective own standalone implementation as well. (like xvid, x264, etc).
Seeing this situation I am only sorry that I lack most of the skills required to bring those encoders up to date in ffdshow myself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
I don't get the problem here. You want a h264 encoder? Well install the x264 VfW codec, and don't use the half-broken and outdated ffdshow version. Same goes for the other codecs, of course. The only reason i can come up with that this is so bad for you is lazyness - and thats no reason in itself.
Actually, I DO have xvid and x264 installed as separate encoders.
Sometimes I use them, though most often ffdshow gets picked. Even though it may not be the fastest, the newest or the very best of output quality at the pixel level.

Consider the end user perspective. A unified codec package for both decoding and encoding, as it has been until recently.
Also, a unified interface for encoder parameters, which many actually share. Ffdshow is thus easier to use (as encoder).
Different encoder packages have their own ideas about what settings to make available to the user and also how to name them. Which in turn gets to be confusing.


Anyway, this is just another user's experience.

But please do not call me "lazy" while quoting "unwillingness to update or fix encoders".


Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
In the end, its the decision of the developers anyway. You don't pay them, most of you don't even thank them, but if they do something you don't like, you get noisy and annoying. A great world that is open source.
Well, yes, it is true that open-source is not about direct payments from end users to developers.
There are many ways to contribute or show appreciation to an open-source project. Including bug reports, feature requests, patches, translations, and finally, actually using it.
I have contributed to many open-source projects with bugreports, testing, a couple of patches doable at my skill level.

There have been some projects shutting out some of their user base with some decisions. Some of them have even forked because of such.
There are other projects that linger features or components for years for similar reasons : developer unavailability or low priority. Some get better, others remained roughly the same.

This is the first major project that I see dropping features/modules/componets in bulk on such grounds.
"Err, it's kinda old, err, i've seen that other program do the same, let's just delete the whole thing..."

It makes me sad.

My few bits...
andrixnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2011, 23:43   #15  |  Link
clsid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,653
All I read is a lot of bla bla but no actual valid points.

We don't want people to use inferior buggy outdated software when proper alternatives are available. Alternatives is not really the correct word for it, since it are actually the original encoders for which ffdshow merely provided a buggy/outdated/incomplete wrapper. But since a lot of people are stubborn lazy fucks, the only way to accomplish that goal is by doing what we did.

Those who are so keen on an all-in-one solution, get a fucking codec pack or something like that.

And if you don't care about using quality software, then just keep using some old version. Maybe install Windows 3.11 also.
clsid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th March 2011, 22:34   #16  |  Link
wolfgangbeyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 8
There remains one open question for me: If I install encoders with better quality separately, the corresponding decoders often are installed too, like in case of XviD and DivX. These encoders seem not to be available without decoder. But than XviD and DivX decoders are installed twice, because ffdshow contains them too. This way the danger of codec conflicts reappears, and the main advantage of ffdshow gets lost, which I was told is to solve exactly such codec conflict problem.
__________________
Wolfgang Beyer
www.wolfgangbeyer.de
wolfgangbeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th March 2011, 00:07   #17  |  Link
-TiLT-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 43
clsid answered this in post 11

In jawors xvid builds you can disable the directshow decoder component. As for DivX, you do not need to install it anyway if you have xvid for mpeg4 part2 and x264 for mpeg4 part10. Just learn how to configure these to meet HW specifications.
-TiLT- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th March 2011, 16:26   #18  |  Link
clsid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgangbeyer View Post
There remains one open question for me: If I install encoders with better quality separately, the corresponding decoders often are installed too, like in case of XviD and DivX. These encoders seem not to be available without decoder. But than XviD and DivX decoders are installed twice, because ffdshow contains them too. This way the danger of codec conflicts reappears, and the main advantage of ffdshow gets lost, which I was told is to solve exactly such codec conflict problem.
Codecs can NOT conflict with each other! Myth busted.

A codec (read: DirectShow filter) either gets used or it doesn't. You can install 10 decoders for MPEG-4 video and each and every one of them will continue work fine when manually creating a DirectShow graph that includes that decoder. The different decoders do not influence each others behavior in any way. When a DirectShow graph is created automatically by a player, the filter with the highest merit will get used when you got decoders installed for a particular format.

If you install both ffdshow and the Xvid decoder, then ffdshow will get used by default because of its higher merit. If you prefer using the Xvid decoder, then you could simply disable Xvid decoding in the options of ffdshow. It has options for all formats it supports. In general, you also adjust the merits of the filters to give your preferred one the highest merit.

When people are having playback problems, it is thus not because of codec 'conflicts'. It is simply because one of the DirectShow filters in the graph is not performing its task properly, usually due to a bug.

In short, you can safely install the Xvid decoder, even if you don't really need it. It will simply be redundant and won't get used. There are also Xvid installers and codec packs available that allow installing just the Xvid encoder.

DivX and Xvid are both MPEG-4 ASP codecs. You don't need both. So just get Xvid and be happy. DivX is not needed.

Last edited by clsid; 9th March 2011 at 16:29.
clsid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th March 2011, 11:44   #19  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 8,850
What people commonly conceive as "codec conflicts" are usually codec packs that think they are smart, and modify the registry either in places that should not be modified manually, or just do it plainly wrong. On top of that add buggy codecs, like clsid said, and voila, everyone is having issues!
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th March 2011, 13:09   #20  |  Link
clsid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,653
What do you mean? Modding the mediatype entries for source filters? That can actually be quite handy when using multiple splitters. Btw, support for LAVSplitter is being added to Codec Tweak Tool to aid people in setting preferred splitters.
clsid is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:13.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.