Log in

View Full Version : BEST quality divx 5 possible...


fyrwurxx
11th August 2002, 20:08
I just bought LotR:FotR and felt compelled to back it up to a 2cd (1400mb) "super" DivX. I've been tinkering with DVD2AVI (the encoder i'm using) as well as the DivX5pro codec -- and i've gotten it pretty good. I decided to use the 2ch english AC3 audio stream, which is 245mb. The rest of the filesize i want to fill with the absolute highest quality video (because any less wouldnt do LotR justice:D ) The best results i've been able to get are pretty good, but i'm pretty sure DivX is capable of higher. I've only been using the 1-pass and 1-pass, quality based settings. I don't really know what either of these mean, and i'm equally baffled at the 2-pass, first pass and 2-pass, second pass settings. My question is, using the DivX5pro Codec, how can i recieve the BEST quality video? (what settings yield the highest quality, even at the expense of time and filesize) any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Also, even if it doesnt have anything to do with quality, i'd like the "pass" modes (1-pass, 2-pass) described in some detail, that would be greatly appreciated :)

DJ Bobo
11th August 2002, 21:07
1-pass quality based 100% without any MPEG4 tools is your guarantee for highest possible quality.

SirDavidGuy
11th August 2002, 21:13
Or 1-Pass, Max Bitrate, Min/Max quant set to 1, and of course, no resizing.

DJ Bobo
11th August 2002, 21:14
there is no quantizer=1 ¬.¬
Min quantizer is 2 in DivX5 ¬.¬
So it is as I said ¬.¬

tripnotik
13th August 2002, 22:59
Yes there is a quantizer 1. Doing as SirDavidGuy said will encode with quantizer 1. The file will be very huge though.

DJ Bobo
13th August 2002, 23:15
DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMN! ... people, there was really a quantizer 1 in DivX5 ¬.¬ ... and it produces really bigger files than quality based 100% ¬.¬

So someone please explain to me why the (a word is missing here :D) DivX programmers make quality based 100% on quantizer 2 "only", when quantizer1 is available, and why I never have been told before than when using 2-pass I can set the damn min quantizer on 1.

DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMN!

Or may be "thank you Mister tripnotik (and SirDavidGuy originally :o) for the reply". Now I'll have even better looking rips :D

And "a BIG BIG sorry for the wrong information above" ¬.¬

and ... a thank you to mister fyrwurxx originally originally for opening this thread ... originally :D

Acaila
14th August 2002, 06:38
You were never told before because it's a bug :)

Besides, using quant 1 makes the file exceptionally large with a negligible quality increase, so why would anyone want to use it anyway?

Fox Mulder
14th August 2002, 07:11
Originally posted by SirDavidGuy
Or 1-Pass, Max Bitrate, Min/Max quant set to 1, and of course, no resizing.

When Min/Max quant is the same, bitrate does not matter; or am I wrong? :confused:

DJ Bobo
14th August 2002, 11:01
@ Acaila
a bug?! :confused:
So can I use it in 2-pass or not? (I have the feeling I will get less undersized files when I make min quantizer on 1 :D)

@ fox mulder
yeah, you're right (that "max bitrate" was just a psychological security, if you understand what I mean ;)).
You still can set it to 0 and it will come as big as with 10000 :D

Acaila
14th August 2002, 12:07
Nope, only works in 1-pass mode AFAIK.

But maybe the codec remembers when you start an encode at 1-pass quant 1, abort, set 2-pass min/max quant to 1 and start encode again. I don't think anyone managed to get it to work on 2-pass though.

SirDavidGuy
16th August 2002, 05:12
When Min/Max quant is the same, bitrate does not matter; or am I wrong?

I added the "max bitrate" part, because I have been flamed many times for saying that you can't set both a quant and a bitrate, and that you can vary one while keeping the other the same (which is true).

eg. "A quant of 2 with an incredibly low bitrate will result in lots of visible blocks" (I shudder to think at what would make someone say this).

OvERaCiD23
16th August 2002, 19:13
to get back on topic, you said you want to make a 2-cd rip. use GordianKnot. it achieves the best quality 2-pass rips (2-pass uses a variable bit rate, meaning the first pass analyzes the video and the second pass actually encodes it, putting more bits to where it is needed and less where they are not).
it is easy to use, don't be fooled by the people saying it's complicated. follow the guides, and you'll definetly achieve the best quality rip possible for 2 CDs. i took the extra step with this movie and used 3 CDs, just because of its length and i wanted good quality.

glishak
21st August 2002, 18:23
I agree, if you want amazing 2 pass rips use Gordian knot.

I use Cladvd xp for the rips, smartripper when I want to find those pesky DTS or dolby trailers to rip them (they're neat) Then dvd2avi with force film, you'll get more bits per pixel frame that way.

Then just GNot with the size of the audio file in the proper box so that the video portion is the correct size. I know that LOTR is 2.5-3 hours long, Ive got the dvd and havent tried it yet, so you should be able to do the rip with 5.1 audio adn 5xx * something resolution with 2 cd's and probably 704*xxx resolution for 3 cd's like that screener rip on the peer2peer networx

later skater

Gannjunior
21st August 2002, 21:50
in the 2pass,only in 2pass-1 the quant =1 is used if you set it.You can verify it looking in the complexity of 1pass.log.however in 2pass-2 the codec ignore it.
If you set 1pass_10.000_q=Q=1,the codec will use quant=1.My friend try it on a chapter of Pearl Harbour: in fast scenes you can see the difference than using 1passQ100% with q=Q=2.but it cost too much about the size.He doubled the original vob's chapter!

ciao :D