resolution and quality questions

[DaveQB]

sorta new to all this so bare with.

i have found though experimenting that reducing the resolution of a DVD when encoding it into DivX improves the quality, less compression artifacts.

but whenever i change the resolution of the DVD from its 720x576 to say 224x400 or 256x400 i get theses like stepped edges on things like people etc, along with the lessing of compression artifacts.
alot less compression artifacts in high motion parts of films.

it does look better, but is there a way to get ride of or reduce these stepping looking edges ??
i notice different resolutions lead to more or less steps, i think that was because i was using resolutions not divisible by 16.

but to rebut that theroy i have found that 240x400 is slightly better then 224x400
:confused:

inversely, if i leave the resolution allow and just change the aspect ratio in playback, there is no steppings at all, but there's more compression artifacts, especially in movement.

i have searched then the net ands theres not alot on these jagged edges i get.

thanx in advance for any suggestions.

[DaveQB]

i cant figure out how to capture a single frame to show as example (done it once before, but its got me beat)

buts heres exactly what i am talking bout
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30005&highlight=image

i am trying bicubic now, but so far, not much difference


Edit: ok found that leaving the width at 720 and messing with the height; changing width to 408 seemed to make it fit perfect without having to mess with apsect ratio's during playback.

this seems to be the best compromise. hardly much jagged edging and the atrifacts werent too bad

[geocapital]

From my experience, a resolution of 500 sth* is the best for not seeing artifacts, on full screen playback.

200* that you use, I think that it is too small, while 720 would be too high (in order to fit in 1cd)

Whenever I had a problem with these blocks, I had to play with the resolution. If not 544*, then 504* or 520*... Start with multiplying with 32, and if it doesn't work, look for multiplying with 16 or 8.