Best codec for HD 720p?

[JnZ]

Hi everybody,

I decide to make The Matrix HD 720p rip and I can't chose codec. I test this three codecs:
- XviD 1.0.3, Q-Pel, 2xB, EQM:v3hr matrix,trellis, other at default
- x264 r.384, 4ref, hexagonal, RDO, at MB&Frames all checked, 3xB fr.
- Vp7 7.0.8.0, Best Quality

But what surprise wait for me, when I encode small test clip. It looks like than XviD+Qpel is best solution for making HD rips? I'm very disapointed with x264 and vp7 codec.

I use 500 frames from scene in office, when Morpheus calls Neo.
Every codec sets to 2-pass 4431kbps (whole DVD-5+AC3 384kbps)
This scene knock-outs every codecs, especially on walls.

Final size of clip:
- XviD: 8 945 664b
- x264: 11 542 528b
- Vp7: 11 573 248b

Xvid is too small, because I set maximum quant. 2. And with this Q-matrix, this scene is too low-biterate.

At links below you can find test images, which I make.
I make pictures from 3 worst-looking scenes.

Can me somebody explain this strange thing, why AVC codecs loses this match? (I know, that Vp7 isn't AVC).

Original:
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/8478/0original2km.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
XviD:
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/2579/0xvid7ny.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
x264:
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/7370/0x2645hg.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Vp7:
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/7181/0vp72sq.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
J.
P.S.: Test clips looks exact as images say.

[charleski]

Unfortunately the image downloads you link fail to download.

[JnZ]

Unfortunately the image downloads you link fail to download.
Strange.For me works fine.

[Guest]

@JnZ

Best codec for HD 720p? Please read and follow forum rules, specifically, rule 12: don not ask what's best. Thank you.

[Pookie]

Just use XVID at a Constant Bitrate, 1 Pass. Depending on the length of the movie, you could encode at 3200-4000, ESPECIALLY if you cut 720p 59.94fps to 23.976fps.

[Teegedeck]

Constant bitrate? Noooooo. :scared: That mode is only a good idea if you radically cap quantizers. Two-pass tested with a clip of 500 frames? That doesn't sound like such a great idea, either.

IF you use XviD, it would be very advisable to use XviD 1.1 (with B-VHQ). If you want it quick you can encode at constant quantizer = 3 or 4.

As for x264, using Shartooth's presets would be a good idea. I rather like the 'CQ_ASP_Q2_eq(crf)'-preset for a speed/quality compromise in 1-pass.

[JnZ]

@JnZ

Please read and follow forum rules, specifically, rule 12: don not ask what's best. Thank you.
I'm not asking, what's best (bad caption chosen), but I'm surprised, and disapointed with AVC codecs on HD.

To ALL: I'm not interesting to make 1-pass encode.

[Teegedeck]

A good portion of your question has been answered:

a) encoding 500 frames in two-pass is NO valid comparison

There could be an easy explanation for your results - x264 has a lead over XviD when it comes to strong compression (I'd say starting where XviD has to use p-frame quantizers higher than 4); depending on the scene you chose for your test, 4431 kbps could mean the scene is easy to compress for XviD at low quantizers. Thus the visible difference could be practically naught (or rather, XviD will look better at quant=3).

b) use a preset for x264 in order to make sure you use a meaningful composition of switches

BTW, the download of your zip-archives breaks down after some KB and the partially downloaded archives are, of course, corrupted. Simply use http://imageshack.us/ for your pics.

[JnZ]

A good portion of your question has been answered....
1) I know, that 500 frames says nothing, but! If codec can't handle this situation...this is bad. (XviD needs much more less biterate to looks much better than x264). I think this is caused by Q-Pel in XviD.
2) I test set x264 again. I make something wrong (but VP7 loks terrible too).
3) Thanx for imageshack, because this is my first post with images, and I don't have idea how can this images attach.

I have screens from 3 other scenes, and looks similary.

[charleski]

Your x264 shot looks like you have deblocking turned up too high, that's why the textures are getting smoothed out.

[JnZ]

Your x264 shot looks like you have deblocking turned up too high, that's why the textures are getting smoothed out.
x264 was set with default deblocking. Without deblock filter, it looks much worse.

[charleski]

No, you need to keep deblocking turned on, but lower the amount of the filter. Default deblocking is 0,0. For encodes with really high bitrates such as the ones you're doing you should turn it all the way down. The textures-loss in the wall on the left of the picture is characteristic of a deblocking filter that's over-compensating.

[JnZ]

No, you need to keep deblocking turned on, but lower the amount of the filter. Default deblocking is 0,0. For encodes with really high bitrates such as the ones you're doing you should turn it all the way down. The textures-loss in the wall on the left of the picture is characteristic of a deblocking filter that's over-compensating.
I make other encode with x264 and it looks more better. Problem was, that I upgrade my old x264, and not uninstall it. With this I first sets defaults and then sets max ref to 4.
But, XviD still looks little better, because no so blocks are visible on the walls.