better looking rip

[Captain_Nipple]

I have a quick question.

I have a dvd of comedian Billy Connolly which is roughly 2hrs 30min long. Now, for the most part of it he is standing on stage doing his thing. I have converted using the excellant G/Knot and NanDub and it looks good. The thing is, I want it looking better;) The average bitrate from G/Know is 699kbps but this is fine because there is not much action/motion. I have the sound done the way I want it so i'm not gonna change it just yet. I was wondering, would there be any setting worth tweaking in a case like this. Maybe filters worth using in NanDub?
Anybody done a rip like this before and if so, what would you suggest.
Or, if it ain't broke, don't fix it? :confused:

Cheers.

[manono]

Hi-you have several choices. I've never put a 2.5 hour movie on 1 CD, so you could try doing it for 2 CDs. You might redo the audio for VBR at a lower bit rate to save space (he's only talking, after all). For one CD, you could lower the resolution, or use Bilinear resize, or use one of the filters in GKnot (slow, slower, and slowest) to denoise/smooth it, or do all 3 in combination. It'll still be pretty tough to make a 2.5 hour movie in near DVD quality. I don't know if it's in Full Screen or Wide Screen, but making Full Screen look good is much more difficult because of the increased number of pixels in a given horizontal resolution. If you have the choice on the DVD, by all means choose the wide screen version.

[Captain_Nipple]

Thanks for reply.
some good comments there. The aspect is 4:3. I'm using MP3Pro for the sound and i have that down to roughly 70mb or so. Everything you suggested is ok, but i'm really looking along the lines of NanDub setting e.g SBC settings. I normally use the "Default.first.pass.vcf" and "GordianKnot_default.vcf" when converting. Any other comments are welcome. :)

Captain

[Ceronian]

Reduce the resolution as low as possible. 544x400 or something like this is recommend.

[manono]

I suspect even 512x384 is too high-480x360 might be more like it-this is a two and a half hour movie after all. I gave you the GKnot filters because you said you were using GKnot, so I assumed you were frameserving with AviSynth. If you want Nandub filters, go find and use Smart Smoother or 2D Cleaner (and use Full Processing). Be warned though that they are very slow. Warp Sharp at very low settings might sharpen up the resulting blurriness a bit. Have you done a DivX quality test on it (File-File information-DivX Quality)? I'd bet it's pretty low unless you already are using a very low resolution. As for Nandub settings, someone else will have to help out-I'm a lazy GKnot user.

[Captain_Nipple]

Hey manono, your pretty much spot on. Thanks for the feedback. I'm pretty pleased with the final result, so that's another conversion to the 48 or so now:) I think this tread really belongs in the nandub forum with the questions i'm asking. Thanks for the info anyways, you can never learn enough. What I love is when a friend asks what dvd you are watching and you tell 'em "That ain't no dvd mate." That's when you realize the conversion was worth the hours of tweaking.

Captain

[AM Tiainen]

First that you must do is that you use DivX 4.xx not DivX 3.xx. You never get good quality movie if you use DivX 3.xx.

[LotionBoy]

First, you're just wrong. Divx4 currently does not look any better than divx3, except at horizontal resolutions over 640. If you do a bad job of encoding Divx3, of course it is going to look bad, but that is true of all codecs. DIvx4 is a bit more idiot-proof, so if you're not sure what you're doing, it is the way to go. But there is no evidence to support the assertion that Divx4 is a superior codec and the opinion of almost everyone that I've talked to is that SBC divx3 is the best looking MPEG4 video for dvd-backup.

Second, this is the Divx3 board and people are asking for help with Divx3 problems. Asking for real help, not someone telling them that Divx4 is superior. So please try to restrain from this sort of posting, as it helps no one.

LotionBoy

[NeVeRLiFt]

Originally posted by AM Tiainen
First that you must do is that you use DivX 4.xx not DivX 3.xx. You never get good quality movie if you use DivX 3.xx.

Your stupid! And I will slap you with my Nandub encoded movies!

[AM Tiainen]

I encode my test movie in 576x240 resolution. And they movie was Gladiator. I encodec hole movie and my opinion was that DivX 3.11 looks in low motion and fast motion as good or better as Divx4. But in scene where was low motion and many moving detail, was divx3.11 very bad. And i know all Nandub options, and how it options works. I have even write instructions in finnish what was 3 pages full text. DivX 4 quality is better because moviw not show never bad, but in Divx 3.11 is sometimes good quality and sometimes worst. I things that is better to convert movie in DivX 4, it sure that movie is never poor quality.

[LotionBoy]

having seen Demi90D's Divx3.11 version of gladiator, I can tell you that Dvix3.11 can handle Gladiator without a problem, as long as you know what you're doing. I have yet to see Divx4 rips that approach the quality of the best Divx3 rips I've seen. Divx4 is a much easier codec to use and it is much easier to get decent results with, that does not mean it is better. I have great hopes for Divx 4.5 and I think by Divx 5, it will be clearly better than 3.1 But that is in the future. Right now, if you know what you are doing, you can get better quality out of Divx3.11 It just takes more work.

LotionBoy

[Peters]

Originally posted by Captain_Nipple
Thanks for reply.
some good comments there. The aspect is 4:3. I'm using MP3Pro for the sound and i have that down to roughly 70mb or so. Everything you suggested is ok, but i'm really looking along the lines of NanDub setting e.g SBC settings. I normally use the "Default.first.pass.vcf" and "GordianKnot_default.vcf" when converting. Any other comments are welcome. :)

Captain

Hi, Forget MP3Pro because there's no Directshow decoder for it actually, so no SBR and you got a shit sound. Better to use Wma!

[NeVeRLiFt]

Originally posted by AM Tiainen
I encode my test movie in 576x240 resolution. And they movie was Gladiator. I encodec hole movie and my opinion was that DivX 3.11 looks in low motion and fast motion as good or better as Divx4. But in scene where was low motion and many moving detail, was divx3.11 very bad. And i know all Nandub options, and how it options works. I have even write instructions in finnish what was 3 pages full text. DivX 4 quality is better because moviw not show never bad, but in Divx 3.11 is sometimes good quality and sometimes worst. I things that is better to convert movie in DivX 4, it sure that movie is never poor quality.

Yet another noobie that does not understand or know how to use Nandub.

[Captain_Nipple]

Hey again,

Peters, you are correct. MP3Pro is shite. I'm back using LAME3.90.
Much, much better in every way. Great feedback all round.
Thanks again.

Captain.

[jeremymacmull]

Hey there,

Well this is to the guy who is slanging Divx 3.11. ive been using nandub for some time now and i can tell u the first few rips i did were shite. however since then ive learnt how to use it and they come out close to perfect. you can get amazing quality with nandub if you KNOW WHAT U ARE DOING!!! if not divx4 is much easier to use. ive got gladiator done by a mate of mine on DivX and i can at a 640X352 (i think might be 272) res and its close to perfect and that was done using divx3

So before u go slanging anyone learn how to use the software!!

LOL!!

JEREMY

[AM Tiainen]

Originally posted by NeVeRLiFt


Yet another noobie that does not understand or know how to use Nandub.

Jep, you must be right. I have only write all nandub options to finnish (over 4 pages). I think that you don't know as good options than i know. I have also read all possible guides from many site. And i have using very long times Nandub before DivX 4 come. That was before DivX 4 only possible way to make high qualitys DivX rip. And i have compare DivX 3 & DivX 4 in many full time movie (i spend lot of time to make both DivX version from movie). And result is that DivX 4 is better.

I know personally one ripper group (EleriumD) that has told to people that they make DivX 3.11 DVD-Rip. But really they are use DivX 4. Why?. Because if they group say that they make movie with DivX 4, every "pro" user gonna told that DivX 4 is for novice. Many Sharereactor member are told that quality is amazing in their DivX-Rip. Sharereactor member say that quality is even better than in Vite and Dominion DVD-Rip. And they really believe that DVD-Rip is make in old crappy DivX 3.11 ;-) How fool they are ;-)

What i have to say before you DivX 3.11 fan believe that DivX 4 is really better.

[Ripe73]

HI!

I have a question about the "DivXgroups" out there etc.ViTE,DOMiNiON.SMB and so on...

Are they really pro's..
I have seen alot of undersized,interlaced and resolution is often 640*xxx on 1cd and have seen Natural Born Killer"proper" with 704X528(2cd).Dont they check how the movie is compressed?
I cant say im a pro but ,what do you think about this?

[AM Tiainen]

Originally posted by Ripe73
HI!

I have a question about the "DivXgroups" out there etc.ViTE,DOMiNiON.SMB and so on...

Are they really pro's..
I have seen alot of undersized,interlaced and resolution is often 640*xxx on 1cd and have seen Natural Born Killer"proper" with 704X528(2cd).Dont they check how the movie is compressed?
I cant say im a pro but ,what do you think about this?

You are totally right. They think that they are pro but they make sometimes poor quality. Also that pro say that DivX 3 is better than DivX 4. But EleriumD Group check allways compressed movie before they share it. Also they compressed movie many times to make max size and quality's. And last they use DivX 4.

Go to ******** and download some EleriumD ripped movie. Then you can say what is quality.

sorry no links to illegal files here - cofferscuffs

[LotionBoy]

First, Keep links to movies OFF THIS BOARD. There is no reason to post that here. This board and this site exist in a grey area, because ripping DVDs is technically illegal under the DCMA, even though it may be protected by fairuse laws. But distributing copyrighted material is clearly illegal in pretty much every country in the world. That is not why Doom9 exists and you bringing that here is not welcome and can only bring unwanted attention tothe site. So stop.

Second, there is nothing 'professional' about rip groups. They are professional because they claim to be. There is nothing about them that makes their rips better than anyone elses. Much like the 'pro' MP3 scene. Most 'pro' MP3 groups still use CBR 192, even though this is not transparent in many cases and it is just as easy to use the --alt presets. Many 'professional' divx groups still use CBR audio. ANd I won't even get started on ShadowRealm and their 'exclusive' codec.

LotionBoy

[cofferscuffs]

@ AM Tiainen

You have taken this thread totally off-topic. I suggest you re-read the forum rules before you post again.

DO NOT post links to illegal files.

[AM Tiainen]

Originally posted by cofferscuffs
@ AM Tiainen

You have taken this thread totally off-topic. I suggest you re-read the forum rules before you post again.

DO NOT post links to illegal files.

Sorry. I tried to remember forums rules next time. But i don't know that eDonkey files linkpages is illegal. That is not like warez site that has hosted or share illegal files. There illegal files are in eDonkey. And if eDonkey is legal so is linkpages. But if you say that pages is illegal, im not say that pages address anymore in this forum.

[LotionBoy]

regardless of what the link was to, posting a link and then telling people to use that link to acquire illegal material is not something that belongs on this forum. period.

LotionBoy

[NeVeRLiFt]

Originally posted by AM Tiainen


Jep, you must be right. I have only write all nandub options to finnish (over 4 pages). I think that you don't know as good options than i know. I have also read all possible guides from many site. And i have using very long times Nandub before DivX 4 come. That was before DivX 4 only possible way to make high qualitys DivX rip. And i have compare DivX 3 & DivX 4 in many full time movie (i spend lot of time to make both DivX version from movie). And result is that DivX 4 is better.

I know personally one ripper group (EleriumD) that has told to people that they make DivX 3.11 DVD-Rip. But really they are use DivX 4. Why?. Because if they group say that they make movie with DivX 4, every "pro" user gonna told that DivX 4 is for novice. Many Sharereactor member are told that quality is amazing in their DivX-Rip. Sharereactor member say that quality is even better than in Vite and Dominion DVD-Rip. And they really believe that DVD-Rip is make in old crappy DivX 3.11 ;-) How fool they are ;-)

What i have to say before you DivX 3.11 fan believe that DivX 4 is really better.

Oh so lets get this straight I'm supposed to believe some scumbum like you, you over my own testing..... wait and Doom9's tests!
I think the choice is right in front of you and me and Doom9 dont lie!
I got $5 that says Nandub wins again in this compare that Doom9 is doing ;)

[Ripe73]

HI!

the winner is Nandub then Xvid and last DivX4.xx,i guess:D

[NeVeRLiFt]

Hehehe
I think Quicktime is best LOL

j/k

[AM Tiainen]

Originally posted by Ripe73
HI!

the winner is Nandub then Xvid and last DivX4.xx,i guess:D

Again.. wrong wrong. In Doom9 test they have use filters effect on playback video. And the true is that DivX4 filter effect is more times effective than DivX3.11. Even there 2 filters step is too much on good quality DivX. There is not fair that he say to all pictures that is not as much detail than SBC if they have use DivX4 filters efect. In test DivX3 filters was in maxinum, but even then pictures was sharpen than DivX4. That test not show what codecs was really best. The best codecs is really DivX4.

[Nic]

I think Doom9 tried to pick optimum settings for the codecs. His results in a very very summarised way were:

SBC = More Detail
DivX4 = Less Blocks
Xvid = Good compromise between the two

& from my own experience, I believe he's correct on all counts.

Cheers,
-Nic

ps
I would have liked to seen a low bitrate comparison to see how VP3 fairs at <500kbps. But I guess ill do that myself.

pps
Anyone that wants the latest (off the CVS) VP3 codec, PM me.

[theReal]

Well, I can only say I have worked my way up to NanDub, and since I'm using Gknot and Nandub I can make DVD rips that I can really enjoy.
I just copied From Dusk Till Dawn on 2 CD's and I can't see the difference to the DVD - that never happened to me with DivX 4 !!!!

[diji1]

hey, come on :) - advanced users ( for want of a better term, i dont wanna sound arrogant or anything ) know that 3.11 provides superior results to 4.xx, but looking the same as the DVD is just straight out impossible...... watch the DVD on ur computer to properly compare it to the backup u make of it.

also, as everyone should know everyones opinion is there own when it comes to what looks better anyhow.

[theReal]

...of course I can see differences to the original DVD. But, you know what I mean... I can hardly see the differences, I must watch it very closely and concentrate on finding the errors. That's what I meant.

I think Nandub compression artifacts are more "natural looking" than the DivX 4 artifacts. I like the look of SBC Divx 3 better than of Divx 4. Although I must admit for my Simpsons tv-captures with a rather low bitrate of 700 I like DivX 4 a little better because the result is darker and the colors look nicer.

[LotionBoy]

Look, when you play back Divx, you're using filters. The fact that Doom9 used the post-processing filters in playback is correct. He set the Divx4 post-processor filter to 3. I sat down today with a bunch of Divx 4 rips and did a little post-processing check. Most of the movies looked the best at about 3 to 5 on the post scale. A couple of the noisey ones looked better even higher. There was not a single movie that looked better at 2 than it did at a higher setting. These were all fairly good rips, and some of them were quite excellent, so avi quality is not an issue here. Doom9 tested the Divx4 playback filter at exactly the right level. And Divx4 was still the least detailed of the codecs. If you drop the post level any more, yes you will get more detail, but you will also get a hell of a lot more blocking and crap all over your picture. 3-5 seems to be the magic range for the best viewing quality. Which means that Doom9 is completely correct in his accessment of the codecs.

LotionBoy

[NeVeRLiFt]

Will we ever have a tool like Nandub for XVID? Will Nando make it so Nandub supports XVID?

NeVeRLiFt

[theReal]

btw Divx 4 PLAYBACK is better in my opinion than Divx 3 playback - for encoding I still favor Divx 3 SBC.

I always use the DivX 4 codec for playback (in Media Player) with maximum post processing settings.
I find SBC Divx 3 files look much better this way than if you play them using the Divx 3.11 codec.

[diji1]

btw Divx 4 PLAYBACK is better in my opinion than Divx 3 playback

i notice this as well - it appears to be a little more smooth flowing, it's a pretty minor difference tho.

[El-LoCo]

Originally posted by Ripe73
HI!

I have a question about the "DivXgroups" out there etc.ViTE,DOMiNiON.SMB and so on...

Are they really pro's..
I have seen alot of undersized,interlaced and resolution is often 640*xxx on 1cd and have seen Natural Born Killer"proper" with 704X528(2cd).Dont they check how the movie is compressed?
I cant say im a pro but ,what do you think about this?

Now mixing ViTE & DMN up with SMB, thats just downright ridicilous.
some groups have people who actually know their shit, others doesn't. End of story.

Oh and the issues most people have with both divx 3.11a and divx4.x is, imo, because its all mpeg4 implementations. Issues as in how it handles black etc.

[Teegedeck]

Originally posted by NeVeRLiFt
Will we ever have a tool like Nandub for XVID? Will Nando make it so Nandub supports XVID?

NeVeRLiFt
Nandub was a tweak to DivX3.11, you could say. (Hm, haven't we talked about this somewhere else before?) DivX3.11 needed to be tweaked because we used it for purposes it wasn't designed for... The new MPEG4-implementations don't need this kind of tweaking anymore. If you feel like tweaking, anyhow, you can use Koepi's latest builds of XviD - I get the feeling he's putting everything he liked about Nandub into XviD. But you can and should just let the codec do its work. What will improve the quality will be B-frame support. Both DivX and XviD will use modified versions of VDub (or plugins for coming VDub 2) to accomplish that.

[Captain_Nipple]

Hey Teegedeck,
Have you any idea when B-frame support will be put to use in DivX and Xvid?? I was recently looking into it and I think will make big improvements to quality. Also, I recently ran a few comparisons with Xvid and DivX codecs and found Xvid more appealing to the eye IMHO.

Captain

[Teegedeck]

Hi,

well, the team is working hard from what I can tell. There have been rumours about major changes in a new version out soon. This might include B-frames, but I'm not sure because this would mean a very _quick_ development.

DivX5 is -- as always -- out next week with B-frame-support...

[DrOutro]

I've been watching this board for ages now... And this post has always grew some anger inside me, because of these newbies trying to be "supadupahmastacuulah". Really, you haven't seen quality, before seen some EleriumD-rips. As we all know, ViTE and DOMiNiON are pro's with ripping DVD's, but sadly TDX-rules denies the use of all other codec's in the scene. Unfortunately DivX 3.11a SBC is no match for other codec's there now is, like XviD and DivX 5.0pro. And just like to Doom9 to know that if you like to watch shittier image (looked closely @ your test and your opinions), then watch it ;) It seems that you had an opinion already before you made that test, so please, put opinions down and make a NEW and BETTER test, without "own" opinion, just neutral opinion wich codec is the best (really).

I found a full codec-test including codec's DivX 5.0pro / DivX 4.12 / 3.11a SBC / XviD out there in address : http://codectest.cjb.net (For you moderators, this link doesn't include kiddiepr0n or any other illegal files you like or don't like) --- and this test seems that they didn't had any "extra" opinions that Doom9 had before the test and they didn't lost any knowledge as did Doom9 with a quote from his test : "I accidentally deleted the file.. I will recreate it, but it was pretty accurate
" and this wasn't the only thing he "forgot" :P

Thanks Doom9 for "trying" to make good test and thanks for all you newbies who thinks that some codec is better than other before even seeing the quality of all other codecs.

[Captain_Nipple]

Hi,
Pretty bold statements. I think it is a valid point though but i think Doom9 has not got the time to at the moment to run another test of codecs. We are all well able to run our own tests and come to our own conclusions IMHO. I don't need a website to advised on what is the best codec as I like to try and find this out myself. As for the anger inside of you, well it's only peoples opinions on what looks better to their eyes. This post is just going to turn to another "Coke better then Pepsi" war anyways.
I can't check out the link you suggested as in work and WinNT will not let me install Shockwave plugin. I will check it out later.

Captain.

[mrbungle]

http://codectest.cjb.net

That site isn't the real choice. You just have to look at the programs which were used to compare the codecs. You can't exspect Gknot to deliver you the best quality. If you are trying to compare codecs, you have to use the best settings and the best programs to encode the movies. I think it is a fact that if you know what you are doing, Nandub is the best choice for using Divx3 to encode movies. You cant use Gknot for Divx3 and Divx4 and say Divx4 brought better quality, if you just pressed out half performance out of divx3 with gknot.
Well something which is maybe running a bit off-topic: Look at the author of this codec compare. Wasn't that the guy who said 'DiVX groups are telling that they are using Divx3 but in fact they are using Divx4' and told us the only reason for that would be that they would be seen as novices if they would say that they are using Divx4. Well i dont know about EliriumD, but i can tell you that dominion or vite are using divx3.11. There is absolutely no reason for not using divx4 if it would be better. Even if no other codec would be allowed for Divx releases, the whole divx scene would change codec if divx4 would be better. Believe me there is a reason why they are using divx3.11. Another thing is that you cant put all Divx groups in one bag, some know what they are doing and some not.
Like i said, i ran a little bit off-topic, but it seems to me that AM Tiainen and the 'i have been watching that forum for ages now, but i am registered since march 02' DrOutro are just too inexperienced in Nandub using to get out good quality with it and now running around telling what an awesome codec Divx4 is, just because they are getting better quality in Gknot with it.
It takes a lot experience and time to find out how configure Nandub for each movie. You cant just go there and running Divx3 codec at 50% performance performance and tell Divx4 is better. And cut out that talking about 'Pro's and Divx groups, just because you talked to one guy who is supposed to be in a divx group and tells you that pro's are using divx4.
We are in a Divx3 forum here and trying to help people who want to use Divx3. If you both are fans of Divx4, help people in the Divx4 forum, but dont come here and blame Divx3.

[AM Tiainen]

Originally posted by mrbungle
http://codectest.cjb.net

1. You can't exspect Gknot to deliver you the best quality. If you are trying to compare codecs, you have to use the best settings and the best programs to encode the movies........You cant use Gknot for Divx3 and Divx4 and say Divx4 brought better quality, if you just pressed out half performance out of divx3 with gknot.

2. Wasn't that the guy who said 'DiVX groups are telling that they are using Divx3 but in fact they are using Divx4' and told us the only reason for that would be that they would be seen as novices if they would say that they are using Divx4. Well i dont know about EliriumD, but i can tell you that dominion or vite are using DivX 3.11. There is absolutely no reason for not using DivX4 if it would be better.

3. Even if no other codec would be allowed for Divx releases, the whole divx scene would change codec if divx4 would be better. Believe me there is a reason why they are using Divx 3.11.

4. Like i said, i ran a little bit off-topic, but it seems to me that AM Tiainen are just too inexperienced in Nandub using to get out good quality with it and now running around telling what an awesome codec Divx4 is, just because they are getting better quality in Gknot with it. It takes a lot experience and time to find out how configure Nandub for each movie. You cant just go there and running Divx3 codec at 50% performance performance and tell Divx4 is better.

5. We are in a Divx3 forum here and trying to help people who want to use Divx3. If you both are fans of Divx4, help people in the Divx4 forum, but dont come here and blame Divx3.

1. I know very well that in Nandub is best programs to make DivX 3.11 SBC. It's not any sense to optimize all options if default options work well in most case. And GordianKnot use Nandub to 2-pass mode. There special options dont raise so much quality that it's sense to do it every movie. I think that DivX 3.11 SBC haven't been so much better that it had affect to rating.

2. No. We don't have say anything like that from Dominion or Vite. We know that they both are using DivX 3.11. We have say only that EleriumD using DivX4 and group has say that they use DivX 3.11 when some other group has ask how they have make so good quality. Before that they say that they use DivX 4 and all "pro" say that quality wasn't so good as they can make with DivX 3.11. And now when they say to "pro" that videos is make with DivX 3.11 (which is not true), they get respect and many wonder how Elerium can get so good quality with DivX 3.11.

3. Yes, it is. They scene rules say that only allowed codecs is DivX 3.11. Ruler are their law. If some (about 30-50%) say that DivX 3.11 is better codec, it stick on rules. If all scene member say that DivX 4 is better (which is allmost impossible that all think same) it gonna change it.

4. I have used very much Nandub before DivX 4 coming, and i know very well what all options in Nandub means. It's fact that DivX 3.11 don't be so good as others codec. And i don't understand why to use such codec which is not best possible codec.

5. I'm not DivX 4 fan. I just use best codec. First was DivX 3.11 SBC, then DivX 4 and now is DivX 5. Only reason that i must do that MPEG-4 test review was that "pro" allways say that proof it. Now when if you don't trus me so i ask to you proof that DivX 3.11 is better. So show something, not just say that because nobody don't trust you if you don't have anything to show.

I'm not gonna anymore aswer to this topic...

[mrbungle]

1. Nandub has a lot of options to raise quality which cannot be configured by Gknot for every well like analyze of human eye can do it. You have to watch the movie to make the settings, you have to view the results to improve them manually. If you do a test, you have to drive the codec to its maximum to tell if its good or not. And that's in fact kinda hard, so do it right or leave it.

2. Doesn't change a thing. vite/dominion rips are more awesome than eliriumd rips (i saw a few rips) and thats not only my opinion. so even if they use divx4, they dont get the optimum with it. you talked about a lot of groups who say that in one of your former rips and thats not true, maybe elirumd, but that proves another time that you cant keep so much on that group and their rips.

3. Well i know quite a lot sites which do allow divx4 since the quality is important, not the used codec. And this isnt in the most cases an official policy. You can believe me i know what i am talking about, you shouldn't get all your infos just from elirumd ;)

4. If you would have known so good about everything you would have got better rips than with divx4, and you wouldn't need to post your 'divx4 is best' comments in divx3 forums.

5. Well if you would have understand anything said before you would know that no codec is the best or the worst. Every codec has advantages and so disadvantages. It depends a lot on how you use the codec, you cant call something the best codec just because you get better results with it than someone else with an other codec. I dont say that divx3 is the best, it just works as good as possible for most of the people. For some others Divx4 works better. Everybody has his own eye. Listing advantages and disadvantges like doom9.org did is ok. but to rate a codec needs a lot more than just to compare a codec with one scene and one program (which gets out not maximum).

"So show something, not just say that because nobody don't trust you if you don't have anything to show." <- would you explain that ? :-)

"I'm not gonna anymore aswer to this topic..." <- shows that you dont have any more useful arguments

[theReal]

Let aside all the "our group says this and the other group says that" gang-talk (because I'm not a member of any group, don't know any groups and think that all that gang-behavior is kinda silly).
Every divx-movie has some errors compared to the original: I personally like SBC errors better than Divx 4 errors, they look more natural to me, more like analog errors, thus more acceptable while watching a movie. Still I do play all Divx3 content with the Divx 4 (or 5) playback filter because I like the look of it much better.

Also, comparing single pictures from a movie is not a perfect test because a single frame doesn't tell me what the movie looks like in motion.

In addition to that I have to say that on the cjb.net comparison site I often can't find valid arguments for "a is better than b". Sometimes it just states: "here you can see that Divx5 is better than Xvid" but I think "Why? I don't think so!" I don't want to say I could find any argument, sometimes it really is a matter of personal taste.

(...)because of these newbies trying to be "supadupahmastacuulah". I don't know what newbie other than you tried to be "supadupahmastacuulah" here. You're the only one who wants to provide us with definite answers about the definite truth of encoding. As far as I can see all others in this thread stated their personal opinions on what they like, then you came in with your "I'm the god of encoding and tell you what you have to believe"-attitude.

[Captain_Nipple]

This tread has turned into a pointless "My codec is better then your codec" war as I predicted a few posts earlier. You see this all over forums, not just Doom9. I started this post way back in mid Dec 2001 and I would be just as happy if it was closed. There is no constructive comments being made at all IMHO. Shame really :rolleyes:
This is the last I post on this subject.

Captain

[mrbungle]

Yep, the whole thing ran off-topic. Everyone is free to use the codec which runs best for him/herself. There is no best/worst codec like i already said. If you get good quality with a codec it doesn't matter if its DiVX4,3,5 or even XViD. The forum is supposed bringing help to people, not for people who telling what they think is the best codec. Its hard and almost impossible to rate a codec and ratings are useless. If a codec runs good for someone he should use it and dont tell others whats good for them. They will have their own good or even superior results after a time of learning.