DivX playback on DVD Player not working

[Jawor]

Originally Posted by Ghitulescu

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]

Originally Posted by Jawor

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]

Originally Posted by kurkosdr

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]

Originally Posted by hello_hello

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]

Originally Posted by Ghitulescu

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]

Originally Posted by kurkosdr

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]

Originally Posted by hello_hello

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]

Originally Posted by Jawor

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]

Originally Posted by hello_hello

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]

Originally Posted by Jawor

... 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 ) 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]

Originally Posted by Ghitulescu

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]

Originally Posted by kurkosdr

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

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 It was like picking a fight with the neighborhood's strongest bully...

[kurkosdr]

Originally Posted by Jawor

(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]

Originally Posted by kurkosdr

How do I enable two pass encoding in AutoGK, plus any other things I may need to chance.

According to the manual, 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]

Originally Posted by Ghitulescu

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.

Originally Posted by Ghitulescu

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.

Originally Posted by Ghitulescu

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]

Originally Posted by Ghitulescu

Exactly my point - people converting DVDs to Divx (and especially those that didn't do this themselves ) 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]

Originally Posted by Jawor

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.

Originally Posted by kurkosdr

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]

Originally Posted by hello_hello

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