DiVX percieved public image problem

[oddball]

Everytime I mention DiVX in a home cinema type forum I get the same responses.

DiVX? That's that nasty pirate format that looks like shit (Basically because all they have seen is a cam job or a poorly encoded movie).

DiVX? Isn't that that defenct DVD type format?

DiVX? It's not as good as SVCD is. I cannot play it on my stand alone player.

DiVX? Never heard of it.

Xvid? Never heard of it? ;)


Explaining to those same people that it can be equally if not better than SVCD but not quite as good as DVD (Yet. But then nobody has done a DiVX from a D1 master ;)) is interesting to say the least. The negative responses always amuse.

If/when we get stand alone players that can playback DiVX variant video them perhaps this perception will change. At present however it has a bad public image problem.

[murattttt]

Here in Turkey, people around IT bsiness do know divx but I had better they didn't know anything about divx. All they know it is a crack of Microsoft Mpeg4 codec (I'm getting nuts when I try to tell if M$ does it that good why the cracked one is far better than theirs.). It doesn't compare to SVCD, has crap sound as well (ARGHHHH!!).
When I show one divx movie they point at the noise that is also noticable at the DVD and think the codec causes it.
One day I'll obtain an original master tape and capture it at the highest setting and prove divx and xvid may even perform better than MPEG2 at one fifth of the size. (Though I don't know how - Maybe HDTV capture).
I also long for a standalone divx player. Not for my own usage, I'm satisfied with my computer and 19' monitor. But to shut the mouths of those ignorant pompous asses.

[theReal]

oddball, you said you mentioned divx in a home-cinema type forum - you mean a forum full of people who have standalone hardware for ten thousands of dollars at home and who are never content with the quality?
I know one such guy, and before DVD came out he was cussing like a berserk because he had heard about DVD being compressed to mpeg2. In his eyes, all compression is crap and if he could buy a player that would play uncompressed video and audio but it would cost 50.000$ and every movie would cost 500$, he would do it, I'm sure...

[binky the stunt cat]

We had an article on Video piracy here in New Zealand a few months ago, going on about VCDs being imprted and being here before movies were released, yada yada yada.
Except they kept saying that all of it was poor quality.....
Wonder what they would have thought if we'd sent them a small video, like the Triple X trailer thats on divx.com......in my experience if the Media say something about computing then there is usualy alot they have glossed over/missed to "dumb it down" for the masses.

[droolian01]

Hi there

I need to defend xvid/mpeg4/divx in the alt.binaries.multimedia.buffy-vampire-slayer newsgroup.

I post xvid encoded caps there, both HiQ 340mb and modem friendly 75mb versions. Some users d/l my HiQ xvids to use as svcd sources with good results.

A newbe to the group posted -

Im new to this, ARe only VCD's shared here, or the better quality DIVX as well?

To which some clown replied -

"Better quality DIVX" - ROFLOL! Nothing like an oxymoron to bright your day.


This has anoyed me BIG TIME. Now, while i can drive xvid quite well i am a little 'lost under the bonnet'. I need smart mpeg4 gurus/passionate amateurs to help me with details of why mpeg4 spec > mpeg 2 spec. I can of course talk about filesize/quality equivalence and other general things but it would be nice to put some hard links/figures up to prove how wrong this guy is.

I know that i will be told to consult dr google and do the hard work myself, but i want to answer this while the thread is current. I am defending xivd/divx after all, i am very happy to do direct credited quotes or better still come over and post yourself!

Come on - give me the ammo to 're-educate' this (oxy)moron!!!

cheers

[NeVeRLiFt]

Wanna see a post thats along this line... and goes over the top ;)
to bad I got suspended for two months during making this thread.
Its a very good read guys.

http://www.vcdhelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=119896&highlight=

Please feel free to post and add your thoughts and views to this great post... to bad the mods moved it and tried to hide it :rolleyes:

some very long posts....

[theReal]

IMO the thread over at vcdhelp is pretty civilized - I've seen other discussions of the type "Divx is better than mpeg2" ...

Not that it would lead anywhere... I didn't read all of it, but I think the award for longest postings ever has to go to xed from vcdhelp ;)

[killingspree]

... that there's the same problem in austria. media say DivX is bad -> parents say can't use divX -although they have no idea what it is or what i do with it, and also how they could check it since all they can do with a computer is use it as a typewriter :-P -
anyway... divX is very well known in the age group of say 14 to 22 or so... and it's getting better known each day.
would be nice to know how many computers have divx installed on them (:

anyway... i've seen nobody who's ever seen one of my divX encodes in comparison with one of my friends SVCD encodes (who does them from my avis) and then telling me that SVCD is better by any means...
i rather heard questions like:
why is the DivX movie on one CD, the SVCD on two and still the SVCD's quality is way worse on a computer screen?

anyway... doesn't really make sense to discuss this i guess
regards

[NeVeRLiFt]

I made them mad at VCDHelp doing this and even had a mod go off on me there over Mpeg4/DivX/Xvid.

His name was King George and he is gone now and they deleted his posts.

I see TechTV talking really nice about Mpeg4 and I see this as the best way to get the public aware of it. To bad only geeks watch TechTV ;)

[droolian01]

Well....
what made me angry is that i always post a 30-60 second clip of a fast moving (hence dificult to encode) scene as a sample. This guy obviously has not even bothered to check out my sample and seen that the quality is >= svcd at 340mb which is less than the filesize of a vcd!

I could post the reply -

""Better quality DIVX" - ROFLOL! Nothing like an oxymoron to bright your day. " - ROFLOL! Nothing like an moron to bright(en) your day. "


But i have calmed down now and can't be arsed

Thanks for the tips/encouragement/support anyway guys

droolian

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by oddball
Everytime I mention DiVX in a home cinema type forum I get the same responses.

Have you ever mentioned Divx4, 5 or Xvid on one of those "leet" Divx 3 only sites? I fear you would fare far worse. Many of them are so much more rabbid about their unquestioning commitment to one codec that with but only a little stirring I suspect you could get them claiming that Divx 3 is better than uncompressed quality wise.

The truth of it is this. There are followers, and there are leaders. Followers will sit behind and nay say leaders all the while they trudge the hard untraveled roads in new directions. Once the destination is reached the followers quickly scramble there saying "we were behind you the whole time".

The moral? Some people simply can not be enlightened. It is icky and uncomfortable. Different from all they have ever known before. Don't waste your time on them. Take the ones who accept you and be happy. The loosers will eventually darken you doorstep. Sometimes quietly. But often with a peace offering.

[amoeba]

It annoys me most when ppl go on about something that haven't even tried, i don't mind ppl who have their own opinin, ie DivX5 vs. DivX3 etc. However it is lame when they bag ur favourite without even trying it, ie that guy who encoded the samples.

And lol at the guy who re-encoded a DivX to SVCD then complained that DivX is crap.

[N_F]

Originally posted by amoeba
And lol at the guy who re-encoded a DivX to SVCD then complained that DivX is crap.
Yeah, that is quite funny.

[Mango Madness]

@ murattttt: It sure would be nice to have masters. But till then, the best source is Star Wars Attack of the Clones because of it's digital filming. (lucas may not be able to write anymore, that's up in the air, but he sure knows how to pick technology).


Its the same crap about vorbis, aac, mpc and other quality audio coding solutions. People just are amazed that they've gotten to where they are and refuse to go further until hardware support is well in the bag.

AS for hardware support of Divx 5 i just don't see a need for it. mpeg 4 is too early in the developmental stage to be called stable or usable in mass market environments. Yes divx is good, but xvid is far better (not to start a flame war, but just IMHO). Yet xvid is still under heavy development that it'd be crazy to support it in standalones. Then you have the new h.264 codec coming to arms with great promise. I think the catalyst for mpeg 4 will be the widespread use of HDTV (ie, it's gonna take some serious codecs to compress that stuff) and HD-DVD.

So all in all, just keep on testing each codec and be openminded. Realize that most people are ignorant of what we discuss here in this forum and what we test and what "enlightenment" we have.

[N_F]

Originally posted by Mango Madness
Yes divx is good, but xvid is far better (not to start a flame war, but just IMHO).
I doubt even the XviD developers would go so far as to call it "far better"... (but of course it's just an opinion, no need to start a war) ;)

[TheXung]

I doubt even the XviD developers would go so far as to call it "far better"... (but of course it's just an opinion, no need to start a war)

I have been an XviD fan ever since the first api, even before h's vfw and I would not call it "far better". There are movies that DivX will win no matter how much tweaking you try to do on XviD.


But back to the topic, I think DivX Networks made a mistake sticking to the DivX name. DivX has a bad name to it, period.