resize method and quantization type

[Ned]

Since Xvid has these variable types of quantization, should we still choose the resize method when making our .avs or should we just use sharp bicubic everytime and then pick the appropriate quantization?

I'm using soft bicubic for my current job and "MPEG" looks softer than "H.263" even though the xvid options explained says the opposite should be true.

[rui]

In spite doom9's guide advices neutral bicubic, i always go for sharp bicubic. I like sharper pictures, but that is a personal choice.

But i never tested xvid using soft bicubic, so i can't really say if mpeg is softer in those conditions than h.263. Like you said, it shouldn't be.

[Teegedeck]

Sharp bicubic is nice, but I'd say you gain about 3% compressibility with each step down unto bilinear.

[Emp3r0r]

so, like always it depends on your source, and it's length, and how much your trying to compress it.

ps: I always use precise bicubic cause I'm a 2CD man, but slowy converting over to 1CD's

[Kyo]

I encode Anime(Lain) and for 200Meg ep i use (#,#,0,0.9) this is very sharp and also h.263 with this i got near dvd-quality

[trbarry]

To what extent can a custom quant table act like a softening filter?

I use SimpleResize because it is fast and crisp, but in some cases I wish that I had some filtering. And yet it does not seem like anything you did with a custom quant for this would take any extra CPU. But I've never tried it.

- Tom