Keep an eye on Xvid

[Houdini]

I think it's time to keep an eye on the Xvid codec.

Have a look at www.xvid.org

Houdini

[Olleman]

Hey!

I was about to start a new thread about this but as I saw this newly started I thought I'd just post here instead.

I downloaded the latest build of xvid codec last night and ran some tests on a trailer to "Hollow man" I used the res 640*352 and 1200 kbit/s for bitrate. I did one with xvid (2-passes of course) and one with DivX 4.11 and I can see that xvid is a nice codec and very fast...I'd say on my computer 10-20% faster than DivX 4.11 BUT in terms of quality DivX 4.11 wins even if it's a rather close one. It wins because it's video is purer and has lesser macro blocks. The sharpness and color etc seems to be more or less equal but that's not that strange since I heard that xvid is built on opendivx sources or something like that :)

So is there anyone out there who also have made tests and came to a different conclusion? I mean, if one read on www.xvid.org it sounds like this codec is SO MUCH better than DivX 4 but my tests show something else. I also know that this codec is in ALPHA stage but if they state on there homepage that their codec is better than DivX 4 then they have to answer to it :)

Please come with your oppinions about this!

Regards, Olle

Computer:

PII 400@450 Mhz
384 Mb ram
etc
etc

[Uli]

I'd made some tests with this codec and have to say it's looking definitely better than DivX but not as stable :(, although DivX is'nt stable either ;)
Maybe you have different default post processing levels?
The XviD codec uses the same Directshow filter as DivX.

greetz, Uli

[Olleman]

I opened both the DivX4 file and the XVID file in Virtual dub (2 instances so I could compare) and I saw some more artifacts/macro blocks in the XVID even if if wasn't much more...

Haven't reallt checked at the decoder properties and I have deleted all the test files so I can't reallt test again with other postprocessing properties either..:(

Regards, Olle

[Teegedeck]

Originally posted by Olleman
I'd say on my computer 10-20% faster than DivX 4.11 BUT in terms of quality DivX 4.11 wins even if it's a rather close one. It wins because it's video is purer and has lesser macro blocks.
Interesting. How were your settings in Gordian Knot when you re-calculated the curve for 2nd pass?


The sharpness and color etc seems to be more or less equal but that's not that strange since I heard that xvid is built on opendivx sources or something like that :)


Nope. All OpenDivX code has been killed ;) and replaced with new code under GPL. Except for a motion search algo that isn't used in motion search precision '5' AFAIK. That code's gonna be replaced, too, soon.

[Olleman]

ok, but nevertheless I saw no differnces in sharpness etc, they are quite easy to see if one compares DivX3 and DivX4.

I used the deault settings in gknot. Just unmarked "motion detecion" and "luma correction" hit "calculate" (o yeah, choosed the right bitrate before that also) and then "save".

I didn't use the "luma" option in xvid since virtualdub seemed to just shut down when that option was enabled in the 2nd pass.

Regards, Olle

[Apu]

would be nice if someone could send me a binary version of the latest release or upload it somewhere, because on xvid.org you can only get the sources. i'm very excited in testing it.

--> apu@dvdcopyworlds.de

[gldblade]

Go here: http://www.heimsnet.is/kg/

To anyone who are getting that DivX is better than XviD, what build are you using? The latest build from uManiac's site is from 1/7/02. A lot of things have changed, so try the latest build if you haven't already.

I wonder where uManiac has been. I was getting used to almost daily builds...

[Teegedeck]

Originally posted by Olleman
ok, but nevertheless I saw no differnces in sharpness etc, they are quite easy to see if one compares DivX3 and DivX4.
Maybe it's because both XviD and DivX are rather strict implementations of a MPEG4-conformous codec that both yield very similar results?


I didn't use the "luma" option in xvid since virtualdub seemed to just shut down when that option was enabled in the 2nd pass.
You mean the 'lumi-masking'-option? Oh, that one still is very experimental. It seems to be next on the to-do-list of XviD's developers.

But I haven't experienced any problems with this function activated, like that one you described. Are you using a very old version of XviD by any chance?

[BlackSun]

This is how newbies will conquer the XviD forum :o

[Olleman]

hey!

no I'm using the last build of xvid

Blacksun, yes I am a newbie to xvid thanks for mentioning it!

Regards, Olle

[Teegedeck]

Originally posted by Olleman
hey!

no I'm using the last build of xvid

Blacksun, yes I am a newbie to xvid thanks for mentioning it!

Regards, Olle

BlackSun is also pretty new to Xvid... ;b

So anyway, all in good humour. But there might be a problem if 'newbie' questions overflood the as-of-yet more technical discussions. Perhaps the mainly non-technical discussion should take place here on doom9's?

Hey, doom9, do you have room for one more forum?

For the lumi-masking crash - I couldn't test the latest build till now, so if I also get a crash as you described it, I'll let you know. If we don't want to blame the crash on the user and don't want to blame XviD, we STILL can blame uManiac!!! ;D (No, I never would of course, where would we be without him!)

[Olleman]

So anyway, all in good humour. But there might be a problem if 'newbie' questions overflood the as-of-yet more technical discussions. Perhaps the mainly non-technical discussion should take place here on doom9's?

That sounds just about right, I wouldn't dream of posting my "newbie" questions on Xvid's on forum at their homepage because 90% of the things being discussed their is WAY out of my league :)

But perhaps it's time to start a Xvid forum here on Doom9 as well? After all, as I have understood it the release of 1.0 is near.

Regards, Olle

[CavalloPazzo]

Virtualdub is not good for comparison: it's better to use avisynth, because it use directshow filter; when you open a xvid file with virtualdub, it's decoded by xvid decoder, and it has not postprocessing. So if you use virtualdub, you should change fourcc code of xvid file so it's decoded by Divx decoder, which use postprocess.

[Olleman]

aha, I'll remember that for the next comparison...but do you really think that it would be that much of a difference?

Regards, Olle

[BlackSun]

BlackSun is also pretty new to Xvid... ;b

:eek: I am not newbie !! :D I came to the XviD board to help develop the VBR_2_pass and it work pretty fine. Just got the all-frames-as-intra bug which occurs with other encoder.

Yes, I was thinking about newbies taking time from Isibaar, h, gruel or suxen_drool by asking questions on their board. I am not sure we should talk about the codec now. They are still some bugs, the codec is not finished and having newbies complaining that their XviD encoded movie got bugs is pretty annoying... This my point of view... Let the XviD team work...

[Olleman]

I think you have understood this the wrong way...I'm not complaining of anything and I know that Xvid still is in ALPHA stage and is buggy. BUT I wanted to know why it's so much better than DivX 4? According to my NEWBIW test, DivX4 is still the better in terms of quality, I wanted someone to say that "nonono you're all wrong this codec os GREAT and this is why............"

If Xvid stated on their homepage that their codec is so much better than DivX 4 or DivX 3 then they are really asking for some tests of their codec, even if it's in ALPHA stage.

Blacksun, you seem to have been anything but a Newbie for your whole life, at least, your attitude towards me and others that you put in the category "newbies" implies that. (ok, the spelling of that word might be VERY wrong). I don't really see the fault in being a newbie, everyone except Blacksun should have been it some time in teir life.

"There are no dumb questions only dumb answers"

Regards, Olle

[Teegedeck]

Originally posted by BlackSun


:eek: I am not newbie !! :D I came to the XviD board to help develop the VBR_2_pass and it work pretty fine. Just got the all-frames-as-intra bug which occurs with other encoder.
I know that of course :)
Just joking.

Yes, I was thinking about newbies taking time from Isibaar, h, gruel or suxen_drool by asking questions on their board. I am not sure we should talk about the codec now. They are still some bugs, the codec is not finished and having newbies complaining that their XviD encoded movie got bugs is pretty annoying... This my point of view... Let the XviD team work...
I'm afraid there will be a flood of newbies on xivd board if we can't steer it somewhere else, soon. In case doom9 is listening now: It may be too early for an XviD-forum but could we have an 'open source encoders'-forum? Because I already noticed that right now there is no right place to talk about projects like vorbis-video, XviD or TruemotionVP since 'DivX Encoding'-forum was abolished.

[CavalloPazzo]

Yes I think the difference may be much. You told that divx was less blocky: the postprocess filter do this, reduce the blocks (not only).
For testing I did some test using fixed quantizer: using divx, xvid with h263 quantizer and with mpeg4 quantizer. The quality of xvid h263 and divx were similar but the xvid file was smaller. Using mpeg4 quantizer the file is already smaller then divx but image is sharper.

[Olleman]

ok, I think I'll do more tests perhaps on full length movies and compare with avisynth or so instead so no Direct Show filters are active

Thanks!

Regards, Olle

[Houdini]

To ask something else

Which code (of the different parts)in the cvs of xvid is used for the moment?
Are all the files in the used partdirectories used?

I would like to have a look in it.

Thx

Houdini

[-h]

Development of xvid is now centered on "core" and "vfw" - the rest has been superceded.

In terms of quality, I am yet to find a single clip where DivX 4.11 outperforms XviD when identical quantisers are used - the only dependable test of codec quality we currently have.

I posted a large quantiser-based comparison between the various MPEG-4 codecs at http://rilanparty.com/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12338&perpage=20&pagenumber=1

[BlackSun]

Originally posted by Olleman
I think you have understood this the wrong way...I'm not complaining of anything and I know that Xvid still is in ALPHA stage and is buggy. BUT I wanted to know why it's so much better than DivX 4? According to my NEWBIW test, DivX4 is still the better in terms of quality, I wanted someone to say that "nonono you're all wrong this codec os GREAT and this is why............"

If Xvid stated on their homepage that their codec is so much better than DivX 4 or DivX 3 then they are really asking for some tests of their codec, even if it's in ALPHA stage.

Blacksun, you seem to have been anything but a Newbie for your whole life, at least, your attitude towards me and others that you put in the category "newbies" implies that. (ok, the spelling of that word might be VERY wrong). I don't really see the fault in being a newbie, everyone except Blacksun should have been it some time in teir life.

"There are no dumb questions only dumb answers"

Regards, Olle

Still a misunderstanding here, I wasn't talking about you. I never said I don't like newbies. I was just explaining that we need to wait before talking too much about the codec. BTW your attitude towards me about this category apply also to you by calling me "the_newbie_for_his_whole_life"...

[Olleman]

Blackun: I Don't think we're comming any further on this one now.I think we'll just leave it at that :)

I understand that the best way to compare 2 codecs it to use the same quantisizers. But practiclly, one wants to have a movie that's this or that long and should fit on 1 or 2 cd's. Then you can't choose quantisizer 4 and then take off. You have to choose a bitrate etc and let the codec decide where to use lower or higher quant, and as I haven't done this "by the book" (without any Dshow filters etc present) yet, I'm just gonna be quiet until I have.:)

Thanks!


Regards, Olle

[BlackSun]

Yes thanks ;)

[Doom9]

how about a forum about alternative codecs? and any xvid experts willing to moderate it?

[Houdini]

I'm trying to use wincvs to get the files but I can't get in.

Can someone help me to find out what I have to do to get it right.

Houdini

[-h]

If you've got WinCVS, you can do a no-commit-access checkout by:

- opening a dos prompt
- navigating to the wincvs directory
- entering "cvs -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.videocoding.de:/opendivx co core" and "cvs -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.videocoding.de:/opendivx co vfw"

That'll get you the core and vfw modules in two folders under your WinCVS folder. Though large parts of core are over my head, it's nicely structured, and if you feel like sitting down and reading the MPEG-4 specs, it's not hard to start hacking away.

I wouldn't mind more comments though :)

-h