DivX5 Q&A

[Doom9]

Q: Is DivX5 better than DivX3/DivX4/SBC/XviD/etc?
A: As Einstein said, everything is relative. So is the quality of video codecs. Some might find codec X more visually pleasing, others may prefer Y and both are right when they say "their" codec looks best but they should not try to impose that opinion on others because what may be right for them is completely wrong for others.

Q: How to best compare DivX5 to other codecs?
A: Encode a clip in CQ mode. Use the same mode for every codec. Rate control that's being used in 2 pass encoding may work different in various codecs and you have the ability to compress mixed with the rate control and you really should look at the ability to compress only.

Q: Where's the DivX5 guide?
A: http://www.doom9.org/gknot-main3.htm

Q: Where can I find more info about Divx5?
A: http://www.divx.com/support/divx/guide.php

Q: What's the difference between DivX5 standard and DivX5 Pro?
A: You can find the full specs of both versions here: http://www.divx.com/support/divx/guide.php

Q: Why is the codec no longer free?
A: This is an incorrect statement. The codec, even the Pro version, is still freely available for everyone to use. The money earned by the sales of the Pro version is used to pay MPEG-4 licensing fees. Here's a link that will give you more info about MPEG-4 licensing: http://www.mpegla.com/news_release31Jan2002.html. Also be aware that Apple is withholding their QuickTime6 software because of these licensing fees.

Q: Will the Sigma X-card play DivX5?
A: Yes and No. It will play DivX5 standard generated if it does not make use of GMC and QPel motion estimation. These two MPEG-4 features are not supported by the card. Here you can find the full specs of the card: http://www.sigmadesigns.com/products...ifications.htm

Q: Should I use the resize, crop and deinterlace/IVTC options in the codec or do them outside (e.g. resize in avisynth and use decomb)?
A: Definitely the latter. All these options are more or less the same as in DrDivX, a never released DivX4 encoding app by DivXNetworks, and they haven't worked that well (especially deinterlace/IVTC).. so you're better off using the tools you use for all the other codecs.

Q: How can I have both DivX4 and DivX5 installed on my system?
A: Please read this thread.

[ChAoS Overlord]

Originally posted by Doom9
Q: Where's the DivX5 guide?
A: http://www.doom9.org/divx5.htm

http://www.doom9.org/gknot-divx5.htm doesn't work ATM... Could you look into this?

[Acaila]

Why do you want to go to ..\gknot-divx5.htm, when the guide is on ..\divx5.htm??

[ChAoS Overlord]

look at the latter you'll see there's a link to a gordian knot guide too, but it is not working...

[user]

Hi all,

I am new to divx, but a little bit experienced in SVCD.

The fastest SVCD encoding was the way, described by MB1 and Angel_SVCD, they called it : The Real AVI-Way.

Probably you know it:


slow via pseudo_avi:
vob -> dvd2avi -> avisynth -> vfapi.avi -> CinemaCraftEncoder CCE

advantage: low space on HD required,
disadvanmtage : slooow



much much faster,

but a lot space on HD required (roughly about 10-12 GB for 40 - 60 minutes or so):

via real avi:

vob -> dvd2avi -> vfapi_avi -> VirtualDub creates a real (big) avi by Leadtools Mjpeg filter
-> real.avi into CCE -> m2v

Though you have an extra step, Virtualdub creates an avi, which takes some time, the whole procedure wins a lot time, hours on my system.
Because CCE is about 4 times faster encoding mpeg2 from real avi, than compared to via avisynth's pseudo_avis.



So,

I have read in divx & GordianKnot guides, that divx5 could be feeded with real avis.

My question:


Would it result to a speed up, if you feed divx5 with a real avi ?

Or is vob -> divx5 faster ?


My system is a P III 600@800, FSB 100@133 MHz,
80 GB HD, 256 MB RAM.

[Acaila]

I don't know about CCE, but TMPGenc (was that the correct name?) is about over 4 times slower than DivX5 encoding through dvd2avi->avisynth->virtualdub. It takes me about 12-15 hours to encode a full movie with that program whereas encoding to DivX5 only takes me about 3 hours (2-passes).
Encoding first to lossless Huffy and encoding the resulting file to DivX5 is still slower than a direct encoding to DivX5 from the vob. I don't see how encoding first to MJPEG and the resulting file to DivX5 could be any faster than the Huffy method though.

But about the method you mentioned:
1) slow via pseudo_avi:
vob -> dvd2avi -> avisynth -> vfapi.avi -> CinemaCraftEncoder CCE

2) via real avi:
vob -> dvd2avi -> vfapi_avi -> VirtualDub creates a real (big) avi by Leadtools Mjpeg filter -> real.avi into CCE -> m2v

Both ways seem like pseudo avi to me since they both use vfapi. And since VDub can work with Avisynth directly there's really no reason to use (the SLOW) vfapi. Replacing vfapi with Avisynth on the "real avi" method should speed things up even more.

[user]

" 2) via real avi:
vob -> dvd2avi -> vfapi_avi -> VirtualDub creates a real (big) avi by Leadtools Mjpeg filter -> real.avi into CCE -> m2v

Both ways seem like pseudo avi to me since they both use vfapi. And since VDub can work with Avisynth directly there's really no reason to use (the SLOW) vfapi. Replacing vfapi with Avisynth on the "real avi" method should speed things up even more. "




(well, first the reason, why MB1 and Angel_SVCD take a big real avi as input for CCE (instead of TMpeg):
1. CCE (feeded with pseudo-avi by avisynth) is faster than Tmpeg (same method)
2. CCE feeded with real avi instead of avisynth's pseudo-avi is about 4 times faster !!! )



The point, why Leadtools Mjpeg filter is used for creating real avi by virtualdub is following:

Angel_SVCD had/(has still ?) on his site (German language) a comparison between a lot filters, eg. Leadtools Mjepg, Huffyuv and a lot others.
The result was clearly: The mjpeg filter in Virtualdub is really the Fastest for creating real avi (and later feeding CCE) from =>(vob->dvd2avi->vfapi (for creating *.d2v to *.avi, yes, a pseudo-avi as input for VirtualDub 1.4.10) -> Virtualdub => real.avi (very big))


I don't know, what makes LT filter so fast in combination with CCE, but has anyone tried creating real-avi by leadtools mjpeg, and later feeding divX5 ?
compared with vob -> divx5 and real-avi by huffyuv -> divx5 ?

well, in mpeg2, it made a huge difference, feeding CCE by LT's real.avi output, or feeding CCE by Huffyuvs real.avi..........

[anomiERIC]

Originally posted by Doom9
Q: Where can I find more info about Divx5?
A: http://www.divx.com/support/divx/guide.php

I saw this on that link...

Integrated inverse telecine
Integrated de-interlacing

Does this mean theres not a need for me to be running the GreedyHMA and other filters that do this? (using autodub but i guess this would pertain to other users as

[crusty]

anomiERIC wrote:

I saw this on that link... Integrated inverse telecine Integrated de-interlacing Does this mean theres not a need for me to be running the GreedyHMA and other filters that do this? (using autodub but i guess this would pertain to other users as

Violation of Forum rule number 1): Read up before asking!

This is answered above....read a topic in it's entirety please before asking questions.....

Q: Should I use the resize, crop and deinterlace/IVTC options in the codec or do them outside (e.g. resize in avisynth and use decomb)?
A: Definitely the latter. All these options are more or less the same as in DrDivX, a never released DivX4 encoding app by DivXNetworks, and they haven't worked that well (especially deinterlace/IVTC).. so you're better off using the tools you use for all the other codecs.

Quote from the faq.

To give you a more thorough answer:
IVTC and deinterlacing in 3d party programs like avisynth, virtualdub and the like are much more powerful and versatile than the build in filters. The internal filters also cannot be upgraded independently from the codec, whereas other filters like decomb can evolve quite fast on occassion.
These other filters are also much more powerful when it comes to special cases, say for instance bad interlaced, bad telecined or hybrid content.
And as to the speed, whether or not the internal filters are faster than external filters, I have no idea. I can assume that the internal filters work in the same colourspace as the codec, so you might gain some speed by avoiding colour space conversions, but you can bypass that with the use of certain 3d party programs as well, like avisynth 2.5.

Edit:
From the guide at www.divx.com about internally deinterlacing:
"For this to work correctly, it is important that the video has not been resized vertically external to the codec. "

[Wolfman]

Shouldnt you update the "stuff" about dr divx.." a never released tool" ..obviously it works a lot better now .. plus you can also work in a plug for autoGK as a free replacement..

[filler56789]

Spam post above reported.

Also: maybe this thread should be locked for good :-|