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 > Announcements and Chat > General Discussion

View Poll Results: How should future codec comparison be done w.r.t containers and audio?
Keep everything as it is (1) 45 22.61%
Dump audio but still consider the container (2) 13 6.53%
Fixed video target size (container included) (3) 90 45.23%
Fixed video target size without container (4) 49 24.62%
I know an even better solution, here's how (post how..) 2 1.01%
Voters: 199. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 19th December 2005, 03:08   #21  |  Link
Elias
MPEG-4 Crazy Lunatic!
 
Elias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxyshadis
Doesn't AAC in AVI have the same overhead regardless of what video stream it's paired with?
AAC cannot be placed in *.avi because they're not compatible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doom9
how do you get dirac into mkv? vc-1?, even theora might be a problem.
Theora (from ffdshow) works great to encode into Matroska with VirtualDubMod.
__________________

Last edited by Elias; 19th December 2005 at 03:11.
Elias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 10:40   #22  |  Link
Wilbert
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6,293
Quote:
AAC cannot be placed in *.avi because they're not compatible.
I'm sure you know this is possible.
Wilbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 11:53   #23  |  Link
SeeMoreDigital
Life looks better in HD
 
SeeMoreDigital's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Notts, UK
Posts: 11,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elias
AAC cannot be placed in *.avi because they're not
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilbert
I'm sure you know this is possible.
Yep.... AVI-Mux has no problems at generating such muxes
__________________
| I've been testing hardware media playback devices and software A/V encoders and decoders since 2001 | My Network Layout & A/V Gear |
SeeMoreDigital is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 12:39   #24  |  Link
Elias
MPEG-4 Crazy Lunatic!
 
Elias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilbert
I'm sure you know this is possible.
I'm not talking about avi hacks... to me that's not really avi. And no, I didn't know that, you learn something new everyday
__________________
Elias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 12:40   #25  |  Link
Doom9
clueless n00b
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 10,570
Quote:
In that case find the size of 128kbps AAC in AVI, and just add it to every codec's output.
Doesn't work in case of Dirac, Theora, VC-1 I guess that's the main problem here.. I have to consider 16 different codecs (that's the entire number of participants this year, qualification and main round combined, plus there are some that won't be in the comparison because there's not enough change in the quality department this year.. so make that 18), 4 different containers, 3 different audio formats.. any solution must be able to accomodate all the possible combinations. So you gotta take about 10 steps back and look at the whole table, not just the 2-3 codec you are using

Quote:
Theora (from ffdshow) works great to encode into Matroska with VirtualDubMod.
Besides XviD, no open source team working on Linux feels comfortable if I use a VfW codec, so effectively it's the commandline encoder for theora, snow, lmp4 and x264 so they can use the same tools I'm using. For instance, ffdshow has another 2 pass ratecontrol than mencoder/ffmpeg.. ffdshow uses the XviD ratecontrol. That's also just another of these little things you are likely forget unless you look at the whole plate.

It's not so easy if you have to consider everything, not just your little corner of the world. It much reminds me of administrative decisions on this board.. people might not understand because they do not have to consider so many aspects of the same problem. It is much easier just being a normal user and care about your set at the table instead of the whole table.
__________________
For the web's most comprehensive collection of DVD backup guides go to www.doom9.org
Doom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 13:03   #26  |  Link
Wilbert
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6,293
Quote:
I'm not talking about avi hacks... to me that's not really avi.
According to Alexnoe (author of Avimux) they are 100% spec compliant to the AVI file specification. That doesn't sound like a hack to me.

http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~noe/.../en_myths.html
Wilbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 13:15   #27  |  Link
Doom9
clueless n00b
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 10,570
either way guys... aac audio doesn't go in every case so it's a moot point..
__________________
For the web's most comprehensive collection of DVD backup guides go to www.doom9.org
Doom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 13:36   #28  |  Link
mg262
Clouded
 
mg262's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 1,148
IMO real-world settings are nice. But not nice enough to be worth causing you a major headache. (Plus, all options give an idea of which codecs overshoot/undershoot, which is the part we are likely to remember anyway.) So I would say go with 3.

Really looking forward to the main round!
__________________
a.k.a. Clouded. Come and help by making sure your favourite AVISynth filters and scripts are listed.
mg262 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 13:41   #29  |  Link
Elias
MPEG-4 Crazy Lunatic!
 
Elias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilbert
According to Alexnoe (author of Avimux) they are 100% spec compliant to the AVI file specification. That doesn't sound like a hack to me.

http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~noe/.../en_myths.html
Well I'll be damned. I just remembered why I thought AAC didn't go with avi, and that's because VirtualDub uses ACM for audio encoding, and AAC isn't compatible with that, right?
__________________
Elias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 14:39   #30  |  Link
Wilbert
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6,293
Quote:
I just remembered why I thought AAC didn't go with avi, and that's because VirtualDub uses ACM for audio encoding, and AAC isn't compatible with that, right?
Yup ...
Wilbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 15:19   #31  |  Link
SeeMoreDigital
Life looks better in HD
 
SeeMoreDigital's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Notts, UK
Posts: 11,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elias
Well I'll be damned. I just remembered why I thought AAC didn't go with avi, and that's because VirtualDub uses ACM for audio encoding, and AAC isn't compatible with that, right?
Yup again!

In-fact.... I'm hoping to convince a hardware player manufacturer to upgrade their player firmware so it can recognise MPEG-4 with 6Ch AAC within .AVI, along with MPEG-2 with 6Ch AAC within .TS


Cheers
__________________
| I've been testing hardware media playback devices and software A/V encoders and decoders since 2001 | My Network Layout & A/V Gear |
SeeMoreDigital is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 16:04   #32  |  Link
Inventive Software
Turkey Machine
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lowestoft, UK (but visit lots of places with bribes [beer])
Posts: 1,953
I voted 1, because that's what I do. I generally use AVI because it keeps things simple.
__________________
On Discworld it is clearly recognized that million-to-one chances happen 9 times out of 10. If the hero did not overcome huge odds, what would be the point? Terry Pratchett - The Science Of Discworld
Inventive Software is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 16:45   #33  |  Link
Doobie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 556
The container is pretty much part of the codec, as far as I'm concerned. If I'm making a Nero AVC, it's going into the mp4 container. If I'm using xvid with mp3, it's going into an avi. The same reasoning applies to most video codecs.

If I'm using Nero AVC, I'm almost certainly using a lower audio bitrate than 128Kb/s (HE AAC). And, if I'm using Xvid, I just might be using a much higher bitrate than 128Kb/s (the original AC3 stream). If I'm using the Ogm container, I'll be using Ogg Vorbis audio which will give me a bit savings greater than the Ogg container itself over avi. But, adding these factors into a codec comparison is impractical.

So, I'm voting for dump the audio but consider the container. #2, I always vote for the loser, 'cause I vote 3rd party.

I can mentally factor in the effects of audio on bits I'll have left for video. I know if I go with HE AAC or Ogg over MP3, I can give the video more bits. And, if I keep the AC3 stream, the video will get less bits.

Last edited by Doobie; 19th December 2005 at 16:50.
Doobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 22:36   #34  |  Link
Atamido
Seņor Member
 
Atamido's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elias
Most containers that are new have pretty much the same overhead
In certain circumstances, Matroska will have a negative overhead. IE, placing the raw content in Matroska will give you a smaller total filesize than the raw content alone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doom9
how do you get dirac into mkv? vc-1?, even theora might be a problem.
I think it is safe to assume these will be available at some point in the future. So comparing raw video data would be the only fair option. Then you could include notes about relative container overhead for the default output of each codec. That would give the user much more information.
Atamido is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 22:45   #35  |  Link
Doom9
clueless n00b
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 10,570
well, you know well enough why Matroska will never be an option for me, so please don't start. It's the same every year.
__________________
For the web's most comprehensive collection of DVD backup guides go to www.doom9.org
Doom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 23:08   #36  |  Link
Atamido
Seņor Member
 
Atamido's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doom9
well, you know well enough why Matroska will never be an option for me
Seriously, I have no clue what you're talking about. But I do have a sneaky suspicion that this post could be a rule 1a violation.

I've been really busy at work for the past many months, so maybe something happenned that I missed?
Atamido is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2005, 23:13   #37  |  Link
Caroliano
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 392
I like doom9's comparisons because it is more realistic and holistic. That is the point where it differs to MSU comparisons for example (despite the quality measure) that are pure cientifical. A codec is not only it self, but all the things around it. For example: VC-1 can be faster and have an greater quality than Xvid (hipotetical situation, not necessarily real), but Xvid is still a better codec than VC-1, because it is free, is based in an open-standart, it is more suported in edition tools, players, hardware, etc, etc....

It is not good take the things isolated, so I voted keep everything as it is, though 3 option would not be so bad.
Caroliano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2005, 01:12   #38  |  Link
alchemy
Registered User
 
alchemy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 18
While I didn't had dvdrw (shame on me for waiting so long) I did all my movies backups with x264/ac3 or mp3 in avi files, becose they are more supported and easy to handle. Yes I do know mp4/others might be more effective, but hey I was lazy to get dvdrw drive, and you expect me to change entire container?

To the topic issue : yes, my backups were being 700 or 1400 mb,
so yes, container overhead is important - since its too often "part of codec itself". While I don't want to mix in differect audio codecs, since it will really mess things up.

P.S: Are going to see x264 in next round? Imo its one of the best out there.
(If not THE BEST)

P.S.S: Can't wait for AVC/AAC 7.1 on HDDVD-R DL media
alchemy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2005, 01:12   #39  |  Link
zambelli
Doom9ing since 2001
 
zambelli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Posts: 1,965
I think Option 3 - encoding just video within the native container - is the best option. Audio isn't the focus of this codec comparison so there's no reason for it to be included. Right now it's serving only as a placeholder. Although ultimately achieving a perfect file size matters, in a video codec shootout it's the rate control accuracy of the video codec that should be judged. Packet and container overhead do matter in the end, but ultimately they're not a property of the video codec.
zambelli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2005, 01:31   #40  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caroliano
For example: VC-1 can be faster and have an greater quality than Xvid (hipotetical situation, not necessarily real), but Xvid is still a better codec than VC-1, because it is free, is based in an open-standart, it is more suported in edition tools, players, hardware, etc, etc....
But Doom9's comparison isn't about free vs. commercial, all it measures is video quality, speed, and reliable bitrate, with an emphasis on the first... Mostly it's so useful because free vs. pricey and supported vs. proprietary can be found anywhere, but what he measures is otherwise hard to come by (and trust).
foxyshadis 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 04:35.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.