encoding in dvd resolution (with wm9)

[billou2k]

I've got several clips that I'd like to encode at their original resolution 720x576 for several reasons, one of them being that it is interlaced and I dont want to play with deinterlacers at all.
I've been playing with several codecs. but I ve discovered a few weird things:
- Wm9 vcm encoding in interlaced mode is way faster than in progressive mode (easily 5 times faster) is there any good reason for that? That seems weird, especially considering that divx or xvid dont have any significant difference in encoding time wether the video is progressive or not.

- Then I had a try with Windows Media encoder to see if it works the same way.. and actually it does. And on top of that I can see ffdshow launched when WM encoder is processing... Is it a normal procedure? Does wm encoder uses direct show to work rather than vfw like vdub. it means I could use any pp or noise filtering or anything that ffdshow can do as a preprocessing for the encoding?

-And the weirdest thing with wm encoder is that even with a progressive video when I set it to produce a local file with complex decoding etc.. it also produces it way faster than with the vcm codec in progressive mode in vdub...
Does wmencoder only doing real time encoding whatever the settings we use?

[Sagittaire]

Quality setting with WMEncoder is in Option. WMV9 Pro and WMA9 pro are very powerfull codecs for High quality encoding ... good choise

http://jfl1974.free.fr/Video/Gladiator-NTSC.wmv

WMV9 720*480*23.976 ~3 MBps
WMA9 5.1 ~224Kbps
source HDTV 1080i

Better quality than MPEG2 6-8 Mbps ... ;-)

[nFury8]

Originally posted by Sagittaire
Quality setting with WMEncoder is in Option. WMV9 Pro and WMA9 pro are very powerfull codecs for High quality encoding ... good choise
WMV9 Pro? Where did you get that? I can't find it in the WME9 video codec menu.
Originally posted by Sagittaire
Better quality than MPEG2 6-8 Mbps ... ;-)
With all due respect, straight-off subjective statements like this are an invitation to be ganged up on by the hardcore elite members here. Better duck and hide. :D

[Sagittaire]

WMV9 Pro? Where did you get that? I can't find it in the WME9 video codec menu.

It's for High Def profil
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs/video.aspx

Better quality than MPEG2 6-8 Mbps ... ;-)

I make the encoding in MPEG2 720*480 at 6 Mbps and quality is better with WMV9, MPEG4 or VP6 and ratio 2:1 ...
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs.aspx

Download my sample ... ;-)
http://jfl1974.free.fr/Video/Gladiator-NTSC.wmv

WM9 solution is very good. it's also for me the most complete soltution of encoding:

1) WMV9 codec
Very good codec. For me better than MPEG4 ASP (XviD and DivX). ASF, WMV, AVI and MKV compatibitity ...

2) WMA9 codec
Best Audio codec for me ...

3) WMEncoder or WMV9 VFW

4) WM9 Player

[McoreD]

Originally posted by nFury8
With all due respect, straight-off subjective statements like this are an invitation to be ganged up on by the hardcore elite members here. Better duck and hide. :D

Your above reply to Sagittaire exibits your unawareness of this page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs.aspx in Microsoft Windows Media Site.

@Sagittaire,
Can you please brief your steps for DVD ripping to WMV9?

My current way is:
1. Extracting the AC3 using DVD2AVIdg
2. Saving the *.d2v project (which accesses the VOB files)
3. Converting AC3 to 6 mono WAVs using BeSweet
4. Creating the *.avs file (which accesses the *.d2v)
5. Using WME9 to encode. video source: *.avs, audio source: 6 WAVs

I just want to make sure if I am missing any better alternative methods. And also, which MPEG2 Decoder and Demultiplexer are you using? I use the Intervideo Audio/Video for decoders and mpg2splt.ax for the Splitter/Demultiplexer. Thanks in advance.

[Sagittaire]

1. Extracting the AC3 and D2V project using DVD2AVI
2. Converting AC3 to OGG 5.1 using HeadAC3He (1500 Kbps ~LossLess)
3. Creating the *.avs file (which accesses the *.d2v)
4. Using WME9 to encode. video source: *.avs, audio source: Ogg 5.1
5. Using wmstreamedt for Multiaudio Stream WMV9 / WMA9 / WMV
5 bis. Using Graphedit and VirtualDubMod for WMV9 / WMA9 / SRT / MKV

Gladiator sample source is HDTV 1080i ... ;-)

[bond]

Originally posted by McoreD
Your above reply to Sagittaire exibits your unawareness of this page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs.aspx in Microsoft Windows Media Site.hahaha
till now i liked this thread but now i cant hold myself back :rolleyes:

is that test made by the same company which claims that wma9 delivers cd-quality @ 64kbps (or wait didnt they say @ 48kbps)?
marketing comparisons from companies count nothing! would anyone expect that there would be results which wouldnt show that wmv9 is the best thing everyone can ever imagine?

[Sagittaire]

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/wi...ies/codecs.aspx

For me ratio comparaison for WMV9/MPEG2 is correct (or MPEG4 ASP, VP6, RV10 and MPEG2). I make this test with HDTV 1080i source:

- MPEG2 CCE 4 pass 6 Mbps 720*480 MP@ML profil
- WMV9 3 Mbps 720*480 MP@ML profil

And visually I prefer WMV9. I can make a PSNR/SSIM Test if you want but a ratio 2:1 between ~MPEG4 and MPEG2 it's for me a good reference ... ;-)

@ Bond

Downloads my sample and done an opinion ...
http://jfl1974.free.fr/Video/Gladiator-NTSC.wmv
http://jfl1974.free.fr/Video/PP-WMV9.reg

WMV9 720*480*23.976 ~3 MBps
WMA9 5.1 ~224Kbps

I know perfectly all the solutions for current encoding:

- WMV9, RV10, VP6, MPEG4 ASP
- AAC, OGG, WMA9, MP3
- AVI, MKV, MP4, OGM, WMV

And for me the must complete solution is WM9 ...

[bond]

thanks i will check it out, but its hard to judge video quality wihtout a reference (the original), especially on such high bitrates :(

Originally posted by Sagittaire
And for me the must complete solution is WM9 ...how do you define complete?

[Sagittaire]

WM9 solution is very good. it's for me the most complete soltution of encoding:

1) WMV9 codec
Very good codec. For me better than MPEG4 ASP (XviD and DivX). WMV, AVI and MKV compatibitity ...

2) WMA9 codec
Best Audio codec for me ... WMV and MKV compatibility

3) WMEncoder or WMV9 VFW

4) WM9 Player

WMV9 / WMA9 / SRT / MKV is also compatible with VDM for edition ... ;-)

I like also MPEG4 ASP / LC-AAC / MP4 with bifs menu but too complicated to make and play. It's now simply with Nero but ND MPEG4 is very bad for MPEG4 ASP ...

[bond]

hm no, no need to discuss this whole thing once again, we will not convince each other :D

lets leave it at "everyone has his flaws" ;)

[nFury8]

I knew it. I knew where this is gonna lead to.:D

Originally posted by McoreD
Your above reply to Sagittaire exibits your unawareness of this page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs.aspx in Microsoft Windows Media Site.
Yes sir. I am more than aware of that link. But bond has already made the counterpoint, so I don't need to. I personally really got nothing against anyone using wmv9, in fact I use it for my own reasons. My original point is, these sort of things will always be subjective and all-too-conclusive statements will only draw reactions from some quarters. That's it. I better stop now before I get caught in the crossfire.:D

[McoreD]

For those who are willing to encode in WMV9 and are forced to leave the computer for hours without been able to do other work, there is a workaround for people with Pentium 4 Hyper threading.

Multitasking with Windows Media Encoder in a HTT enabled PC (http://microsoftusernetwork.com/mcored/knowledgebase/kb-htt.htm)

[Sagittaire]

Ctrl+alt+suppr and priority idle ... for all codec and all CPU ... ;-)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Well there is no doubt that WMV9 at DVD 'resolutions' (And bye the way, I hate using that word to describe image pixel frame sizes) is a very capable codec!

However, despite it being described as "the most complete soltution of encoding" I would not go that far.... And anyway encodings one thing. What about decoding (ie: viewing)?

At this present moment in time, in order to view your WMV9 encodes, it means you're stuck behind your PC monitor.... Where are all the stand-alone players that can be connected to big screens!

I would far rather spend 100 euros on a (Mpeg4) stand-alone player, that can connect to my TV, than shell-out 1500 euros on a 'Media Centre' PC!

Cheers

[Sagittaire]

WM9 or/and H264 for futur HD-DVD ... ?

WM9 in 720p for futur Chip Kiss platine ... ?

[bond]

guys, no need for "mine is bigger than yours" discussions, it leads to nothing ;)

[Sagittaire]

25 cm ... ;-)

[SeeMoreDigital]

10 inches... :D

[bond]

damn, only 5cm here ;)

[Latexxx]

Your cars are really small! :D My car is at least 3.5 m long.

[nFury8]

By the beard of Gandalf! This thread is going on a roller-coaster ride. But it's something that is measurable though. I have a feeling it will grow to an immense 'length'.

[Sagittaire]

Another demo for Fansuber: Sample Animatrix - Program

http://jfl1974.free.fr/Video/Animatrix.wmv
WMV9 720*576 1250 kbps
WMA9 Pro 5.1 160 Kbps

and another Codec Comparaison ... please Doom9 ... It really does not show the real quality of the codec... when I read that XviD 1.0 is the best codec I am very surprised ... ;-)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by Sagittaire
...and another Codec Comparaison ... please Doom9 ... It really does not show the real quality of the codec... when I read that XviD 1.0 is the best codec I am very surprised ... ;-) Agreed. A codec comparison using PAL and NTSC DVD image pixel frame sizes is a good idea. As I think it would produce different results to previous 'crop and resize' tests...

It would be great if Doom9 could oblige but given the quantity of work involved I would not expect such a comparison any time soon. Unless of course we were all able to help in some way!

Cheers

[Stebet]

Originally posted by billou2k
I've got several clips that I'd like to encode at their original resolution 720x576 for several reasons, one of them being that it is interlaced and I dont want to play with deinterlacers at all.

I was wondering about the part where you don't want to mess with deinterlacers. Are today's video cards capable of deinterlacing WM9 content (i thought that only applied to MPEG2)? I know mine doesn't (Geforce 4Ti)! Anyone have any more info on this?

[Stebet]

Scratch that. It seems my video card does deinterlace after all. I didn't shut down Windows Media Encoder before i tried playing the file and it seems it was keeping my card (or overlays) occupied with something else. After i shut down WME9 my interlaced WM9 content plays back deintarlaced just fine in WMP9. Quite cool! Now i wonder if there are any significant differences in encoding quality when encoding deinterlaced or interlaced? Anyone care to do some testing (My Athlon XP2000 is so damn slow :D)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by billou2k
I've got several clips that I'd like to encode at their original resolution 720x576 for several reasons, one of them being that it is interlaced and I dont want to play with deinterlacers at all. Just a general question, not just to billou2k.

Why do some people not want to de-interlace, interlaced video?

Cheers

[Latexxx]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
Just a general question, not just to billou2k.

Why do some people not want to de-interlace, interlaced video?

Cheers

Because deinterlacing real interlaced content means quality loss. Deinterlace/convert-to-50-Hz-and-resize-back-to-576 preserves more of the original content and doesn't cause deinterlacing artifacts.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by Latexxx
Because deinterlacing real interlaced content means quality loss. Deinterlace/convert-to-50-Hz-and-resize-back-to-576 preserves more of the original content and doesn't cause deinterlacing artifacts. I guess I should have been more specific.

Personally I would never de-interlace video to a smaller image pixel frame size than the interlaced source!

Cheers

[Demi9OD]

Is WME9 technically any better or newer than the VCM codec?

[McoreD]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
At this present moment in time, in order to view your WMV9 encodes, it means you're stuck behind your PC monitor.... Where are all the stand-alone players that can be connected to big screens!

I watch WMV9 in my 21" Sony Flatscreen!


Hint: XboX. ;)

[bond]

Originally posted by Demi9OD
Is WME9 technically any better or newer than the VCM codec? i somewhere read that vcm doesnt offer b-frames (avi doesnt like them)

maybe mcored can tell us more about the differences?

[Sagittaire]

WMV9 VCM Without Bframe and WMEncodeur with BFrame ...

pixel ratio for WMEncodeur not for WMV9 VCM ...

Hardware decoding profil for WMV9 VCM ...

[McoreD]

javascript:checklength(document.vbform);
There are many advantages in WME9 over WMV9 VCM :)

What Bond and Sagittaire said, plus:
Inverse Telecine
Encoding to WMA9 Pro and other WM audio formats ;)
Attributes support
External Plugin support (I sometimes use plugins from WinDVD)
Batch encoding (for non-2-pass VBR encodes)

WMV9 VCM has two options while resizing:
Bilinear and Bicubic (slow), I haven't seen these two options in WME9.

Since I choose the WMV file container, I always use Windows Media Encoder 9.

[Demi9OD]

Mcore, are B-frames always enabled or do you have to change something in the encoding properties?

If I choose to NOT use forced film in DVD2AVI (mixed content) Is there any reason to use WME9 to IVTC rather than avisynth? The "Auto Detect" option doesn't work with avs files, it returns some error message. I am also assuming if I IVTC in my script I should put the target framerate at 23.976 in WME9.

I will probably answer some of my own questions this afternoon when my first attempt at WME9 finishes encoding (Band of Brothers DVD1). I am splitting each disc of 2 eps into 2 CDs (about 50 minutes per CD) and figured using WM9 at full res would be the best option.

[Sagittaire]

No Bframe for WMV9 VCM but for me WMV9 VCM is better than WMVEncodeur for usual "DivX resolution" (~200 000 pixels)

WMEncodeur is very good for High Resolution encoding ...

[RadicalEd]

That's funny, I once ran tests WME v. WM VCM, and the results were pixel-for-pixel bit-for-bit identical. http://www.animemusicvideos.org/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_neutral.gif

[Sagittaire]

No identical result for PSNR test and visual test for me ...

[jflatt]

What triggers the WMV9 Pro codec? Having HD sized input like 1280x720? If thats the case, I can just resize my DVD source using a Lanczos method, and then let WME resize it down?

[McoreD]

@jflatt, WMV9 Pro codec is used by WME when encoding at higher bitrate (approx. 1400 Kbps +)
For example:
712 x 544 at 1450 Kbps gives me Windows Media Video 9 Professional

Windows Media Video 9 Professional
For content with ultra-high video quality WMV9 Pro defines profiles of the Windows Media Video 9 codec automatically applied at higher bit rates and resolutions. Its efficiency can bring high-definition quality to PC users, enabling storage and delivery of a complete movie at 720p resolution (1280 x 720 pixels per frame)
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs/video.aspx

@Demi9OD,

I haven't found any option in WME9 which let us to choose between bilinear and bicubic resizing.

I assume you got horizontal lines in playback and hence you why are trying to IVTC?

Here are some FYI:

"Only 30fps telecined from 24fps can be converted back to 24fps by IVTC.
If every frame is interlaced (most TV news and shows), we must apply deinterlace instead of IVTC."

"In WME9, the setting you specify in Frame Rate represents the maximum fps."

For testing purposes, encode in CBR and set the Limit by Duration to 2 minutes or so.

Try IVTC in WME9 and set it to Auto. If that doesn't solve the problem, you are left with IVTC by AviSynth.

I think you can also use AviSynth to specify the frame rate by using the command: AssumeFPS(24)

All the Best,
McoreD

[Demi9OD]

The encode worked fine using avisynth IVTC and 23.976fps set in WME9, just wondered if there would be a speed difference using the internal IVTC, I got around 3.6fps on the second pass, 3.45ghz P4.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by billou2k
I've got several clips that I'd like to encode at their original resolution 720x576 for several reasons, one of them being that it is interlaced and I dont want to play with deinterlacers at all.

Might I ask why? I admit there are some sources that should just not be deinterlaced. For instance those rare true interlace material. But when I think DVD I think movies and for that it is silly not to deinterlace. It does depend on your source. But you should familiarise yourself with deinterlacing techniques IMHO.

Originally posted by billou2k
I've been playing with several codecs. but I ve discovered a few weird things:
- Wm9 vcm encoding in interlaced mode is way faster than in progressive mode (easily 5 times faster) is there any good reason for that? That seems weird, especially considering that divx or xvid dont have any significant difference in encoding time wether the video is progressive or not.

Without knowing the innerworkings of the codec it is impossible to say for sure. But I suspect it has something to do with the way the codec handles interlacing and poor scaling of the algorythms Microsoft uses. When handling interlaced material it is possible to treat it as half vertical resolution double frame rate. If that is the case and WM scales poorly with verticle resolution it might be a possible explanation. Then again I could be out in left field. I suspect the only person on the forum who could really offer insight is Amir.

Originally posted by billou2k
- Then I had a try with Windows Media encoder to see if it works the same way.. and actually it does. And on top of that I can see ffdshow launched when WM encoder is processing... Is it a normal procedure?

No. This only happens when you have ffdshow set to handle the particular fourcc of the source or raw video in general.

Originally posted by billou2k
Does wm encoder uses direct show to work rather than vfw like vdub.

Yes.

Originally posted by billou2k
it means I could use any pp or noise filtering or anything that ffdshow can do as a preprocessing for the encoding?

Indeed. And it gets better. Recent ffdshow releases come with a general vfw ffmpeg based decoder with all the same features. So it is possible to do the same in Virtualdub alone as well. Or via Avisynth's directshowsource input. :D

Originally posted by billou2k
-And the weirdest thing with wm encoder is that even with a progressive video when I set it to produce a local file with complex decoding etc.. it also produces it way faster than with the vcm codec in progressive mode in vdub...
Does wmencoder only doing real time encoding whatever the settings we use?

I did not quite get that. Your question confused me. Care to rephrase or does anyone else know?

Originally posted by Sagittaire
WM9 solution is very good. it's also for me the most complete soltution of encoding:

You realise that WM9 is no more a complete solution than MPEG4 is. "WM9 is a more complete solution" sounds like more FUD. MPEG4 is every bit as complete a solution as WM9. The only difference is that Microsoft can give away their WM9 products because they have a monopoly to fund it. While MPEG4 companies are left strugling trying to fund their products by sales of their products. There are very complete very good MPEG4 solutions.

I respect everything you say since as you say "for you" they are the best. When it comes down to it we all have our oppinions. And lets all respect that and keep it from escalating into something we don't want. Which I easily think this could become if we are not careful. Since the first post alone we have veered dangerously off topic.

On that topic though I was having some real trouble with an encode I was doing. It was a short music video. Goldfrapp - Twist to be specific. I was encoding for 640x480 @2Mbps from an NTSC capture of a PAL transfer. Needless to say the source is not that clean. There are several fast moving dark segments with brick textured walls etc. So in the output it looked kinda like flowing mud in Xvid. Divx Pro looked worse to me when I tried it. I thought what the hey I'll try WM9 again. WM9 Pro was just awfull. Worse "for me" than even Divx Pro. It took longer and the result was visually worse. Then I thought MPEG quantization matricies in Xvid! Bam instant improvement. The custom quantization matrix feature of Xvid has pulled through for me in some of my most dificult encodes. And that is one of the many reasons why "for me" Xvid is the best choice.

But then again every codec has those odd killer sceens etc.

Originally posted by McoreD
Your above reply to Sagittaire exibits your unawareness of this page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/9series/codecs.aspx in Microsoft Windows Media Site.

Please refrain from baiting people. Lets keep this from becoming a flame fest. And don't call people for hypocracy with hypocracy. Because that would make one a hypocrit. Taking the advertising hype produced by the company or funded by the company that made the product is just naieve. I can post several pages from on2.com and even Divx.com to better your claim. But that would be pointless. Since they all skew towards their products and tend to exagerate.

[dvwannab]

Originally posted by Sagittaire
1. Extracting the AC3 and D2V project using DVD2AVI
2. Converting AC3 to OGG 5.1 using HeadAC3He (1500 Kbps ~LossLess)
3. Creating the *.avs file (which accesses the *.d2v)
4. Using WME9 to encode. video source: *.avs, audio source: Ogg 5.1
5. Using wmstreamedt for Multiaudio Stream WMV9 / WMA9 / WMV
5 bis. Using Graphedit and VirtualDubMod for WMV9 / WMA9 / SRT / MKV

Gladiator sample source is HDTV 1080i ... ;-)

Sagittaire,

Just a quick question for you. How do you capture/transfer your HDTV file to your computer hard-drive? What method do you use?

I ask this because I am not sure how you would capture 1280x720 or higher resolution file and be able to keep that resolution on the transfer to your computer.

I am going to subscribe to HDTV on dishnetwork, so I am looking for the best method to capture - transfer - encode to HD-DVD, HD-DivX, HD-XviD and HD-WMV.

Any help/suggestions you or anyone else can offer would be greatly appreciated.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by dvwannab
Sagittaire,

Just a quick question for you. How do you capture/transfer your HDTV file to your computer hard-drive? What method do you use? As far as I'm aware Sagittaire does not have any genuine Mmpe2 HD source material, such as that currently broadcasted!

I have a few NTSC HD samples but as I live in Europe (the same as Sagittaire) we only have access to one PAL HD satellite channel!

Cheers

[dvwannab]

So I guess his reference to the Gladiator source for his sample may have come from a DVD.

Hmmmm........ the search continues then :mad: grrrrrrhhh

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by dvwannab
So I guess his reference to the Gladiator source for his sample may have come from a DVD.

Hmmmm........ the search continues then :mad: grrrrrrhhh I guess so. He did a similar thing with a Harry Potter trailer!

Upsizing from 720x480/576 DVD sources to 1280x720 or 1920x1080(8) is not really a very good indicator as to how HD would look!

What are you looking for and why?

[jflatt]

dvwannab:
I think you are looking for a mod to your dish receiver that will allow the stream to be copied over the ieee1394 port. They offer things like this at www.169time.com
As far as HD broadcasts, they are around. The best ones I've seen seem to come from HBO using one of the above methods. All the local channels around here always insert their damned station logos.

[Sagittaire]

@ Neo Neko

On that topic though I was having some real trouble with an encode I was doing. It was a short music video. Goldfrapp - Twist to be specific. I was encoding for 640x480 @2Mbps from an NTSC capture of a PAL transfer.

Source ... please ... ;-)

[McoreD]

Originally posted by Neo Neko
WM9 Pro was just awfull. Worse "for me" than even Divx Pro.
The quality of both WMV8 and WMV9 can seriously affect from other installed codec packs and/or some other codecs/demultiplexers (I am still investigating which ones are they).
Once I used to get very bad quality from WMV9, even when I encoded at 3000 Kbps. The quality was similar to an encode of ~150 Kbps. I had no problems with the quality of encoded DivX/XviD at that time.

Finally with regsvr32 I sort of fixed the problem. But still I wasn't satisfied until I gave a clean format and installed only WinDVD, DivX Pro and Windows Media Encoder.

Please refrain from baiting people.
My apologizes for that reply. It won't happen again. :)

I just couldn't resist when he said: With all due respect, straight-off subjective statements like this are an invitation to be ganged up on by the hardcore elite members here. Better duck and hide.

Cheers,
McoreD

[dvwannab]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
I guess so. He did a similar thing with a Harry Potter trailer!

Upsizing from 720x480/576 DVD sources to 1280x720 or 1920x1080(8) is not really a very good indicator as to how HD would look!

What are you looking for and why?

SMD,

I am just looking for the best way to get a HDTV recording from the recorder's hard-drive into my computer's hard-drive. Once on the computer hard-drive, I would then create HD-DVD, HD-DivX and HD-XviD whenever I wanted to.

by jflatt
[B]dvwannab:
I think you are looking for a mod to your dish receiver that will allow the stream to be copied over the ieee1394 port. They offer things like this at www.169time.com
As far as HD broadcasts, they are around. The best ones I've seen seem to come from HBO using one of the above methods. All the local channels around here always insert their damned station logos. [B]

Thanks jflatt. I will take a look-see there.

[nFury8]

Originally posted by McoreD

My apologizes for that reply. It won't happen again. :)

I just couldn't resist when he said: With all due respect, straight-off subjective statements like this are an invitation to be ganged up on by the hardcore elite members here. Better duck and hide.

Cheers,
McoreD

Heh. I respect everyone's opinion, but it was not the first time he's been making that kind of be-all end-all statements, and besides my reply was intended as a light-hearted joke. I'm going to let this go right here, and for what it's worth I apologize to Sagittaire if he took offense from that. But for you, I also could not resist when you link self-praising reference like that microsoft material, its just plain naive. So let's just make love not war, for the sake of world peace. Peace.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by Sagittaire
@ Neo Neko



Source ... please ... ;-)

It's done the source is gone. It was just some bad footage and in this instance Xvid did it best. WM9 is fine. Not really any better than MPEG4. But on par. Just alot slower to encode on any PC and alot harder to decode on the majority of my PC which run either BSD or Linux. So for me WM9 is just a poor solution. ;) Not a bad one. :D

[Sagittaire]

For me WMV9 is visualily better than MPEG4 ASP ...

WMV9 is better than MPEG4 ASP in tests PSNR/SSIM especially for low bitrates ...
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64789

[Tommy Carrot]

WMV9 is indeed better... at low, streaming bitrates, but i think most of us are not really interested in that. On the usual stuff (~800 kbps and above) i cannot say it's better. On par, as Neo Neko said, but not better, so it's not worth to messing with it (plus there is also the M$ factor :D). And we all know PNSR and other artificial quality measures are how reliable...

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by Sagittaire
For me WMV9 is visualily better than MPEG4 ASP ...

WMV9 is better than MPEG4 ASP in tests PSNR/SSIM especially for low bitrates ...
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64789 Correct me if I'm wrong but... I thought the idea of this thread was to ascertain which codec performs better when using DVD image pixel frame sizes!

...If this is the case why have you provided a link to your "[Test Codec] VP6, RV10 'Elysian', WMV9, DivX 5, XviD 1.0 ..." encode tests, which were all 'cropped and resized'!

I don't wan't to knock your findings but you will only confuse people if you relate the results of your 'non-crop/resized' tests (in this thread) with your 'cropped/resized' tests (in your other thread).

Cheers

[avih]

Originally posted by Sagittaire
For me WMV9 is visualily better than MPEG4 ASP ...

WMV9 is better than MPEG4 ASP in tests PSNR/SSIM especially for low bitrates ...
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64789

I think you've made your point clear by now. You like WMx. that's fine. All over the place you're referencing (mostely) a single thread on which you compared a scene from Harry Potter. As much as this is a good thread, this is not enough by any professional standard. For real comparision you need many spectators, many scenes, and many different profiles.

I don't know who sent you, but I think enough is enough. Either come up with rock solid proofs for your claims or be gone. And please don't sell me the "But it's only MY oppinion" argument. I really don't like the way you try to manipulate less knowledgable users on this forum. Your strikes are near. Take notice.

avih

[Sagittaire]

Originally posted by avih
I think you've made your point clear by now. You like WMx. that's fine. All over the place you're referencing (mostely) a single thread on which you compared a scene from Harry Potter. As much as this is a good thread, this is not enough by any professional standard. For real comparision you need many spectators, many scenes, and many different profiles.

avih [/B]

For me best video codec isn't WMV9. For me in order VP6, RV10, WMV9, XviD and DivX. But when some say "XviD is the best" or "WMV9 it's a big ****", it isn't the truth ...

It isn't because it's a micro$oft product which it's obligatorily the worst quality and it isn't because it's Open Source which it's obligatorily the best quality ...

[Valeron]

Originally posted by Sagittaire

It isn't because it's a micro$oft product which it's obligatorily the worst quality and it isn't because it's Open Source which it's obligatorily the best quality ...

Yes!You're right!
Though they can't post any comparison to proove so.
:D Cause M$!......
Perhaps Bill just as Hitler in their mind:
"He stole money from my pocket!"

A group peace defender...:D

[billou2k]

Sorry I've been away for a while so I'll try to catch up with the posts...

@NeoNeko and SeeMoreDigital
Well the reason I dont want to play with deinterlacers is that I want to encode TV shows and true interlaced stuff
and I plan to play it on TV through a video box (at the moment xbox) that can deal with interlaced materials the proper way. (For backuping films I just do it the usual way from my PAL dvds)
I played with deinterlacers and playing both the original (interlaced) on the TV and deinterlaced videos on the computer screen at the same time makes things clear than no deinterlacer (25fps) can compare with the interlaced stuff... its more smooth more clear more natural (though I hate the complications it involves:D )

@NeoNeko
About the interlaced videos being encoded 5 times faster in wm9 than progressive equivalents... thanks for your ideas, and if Amir could give us some tips here he would be welcome!;-)

About my last sentence, sorry sometimes I forget to be clear;-) I'll try again:
Using WMEncoder (on a progressive video) with the maximum quality settings, it produces the wmv file faster (not 5 times but still significantly faster) than the vcm codec at max quality setting too. And then again it's difficult to understand... Even more now that I read from McoreD that vcm doesnt handle B frames at all...

@Stebet
About wm9 playbacked on the pc, it seems that it is deinterlaced automatically and I didnt find anyway to turn it off (at least on the pc screen):
I've borrowed an old matrox card that could output a proper interlaced signal (720*576) to the TV:
Interlaced wm9 videos from WMencoder are displayed ok on the TV with the matrox (50 fields/s) (but still deinterlaced on the pc monitor),
Whereas the same videos encoded with the wm9 vcm are deinterlaced first before displayed on the TV by the Matrox (pausing in an action scene doesnt show any movement when you should actually see the two interlaced fields clearly)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by billou2k
Sorry I've been away for a while so I'll try to catch up with the posts...

@NeoNeko and SeeMoreDigital
Well the reason I dont want to play with deinterlacers is that I want to encode TV shows and true interlaced stuff
and I plan to play it on TV through a video box (at the moment xbox) that can deal with interlaced materials the proper way. (For backuping films I just do it the usual way from my PAL dvds)
I played with deinterlacers and playing both the original (interlaced) on the TV and deinterlaced videos on the computer screen at the same time makes things clear than no deinterlacer (25fps) can compare with the interlaced stuff... its more smooth more clear more natural (though I hate the complications it involves:D ) I would'nt have thought you'd see any real negative effects de-interlacing interlaced sources. I do it all the time with my high bitrate PAL Mpeg2 captures (via ADS USB2).

I also de-interlaced all the interlaced HiDef 1080 clips Wilbert gave me and they looks darn good to me when viewed on either my CRT TV or plasma. Maybe it because I use a 'hardware' Mpeg card with TV output rather than an graphics card!

And with regard to viewing 'true interlaced' material on a PC monitor. I doubt you notice that it is interlaced as most software players de-interlace it anyway

I have some field test encodes you can try on my web site if you're interested!

Cheers

[billou2k]

It might not be obvious pointing out the difference between a properly displayed interlaced video on a tv and the same video deinterlaced on a pc but I can assure you that when you play both on 2 screens side by side at the same time you can clearly see the difference. (and I "think" that's not subjective at all)

What do you mean by deinterlacing your HD 1080i and mpeg2 captured clips? Do you mean for the playback on your computer screen or for reencoding in progressive?
If you use your hardware card to play mpeg2 PAL interlaced videos on your TV then yes your clips will look great on your TV no doubt about it. I dont have one of these cards (although the matrox card does something similar) but I assume they are designed to play interlaced stuff (PAL) on TV unlike the usual 2d-3d cards who might have some full screen theater options but do not do things properly (at least for the nvidia card and drivers version I tried)

With most softwares players/decoders you can deactivate the auto deinterlacing (apart from wm9 and wmp9 apparently) so it makes it clear wether you are dealing with interlaced stuff or not. (and even deinterlaced show some typical artefacts that make them easy to spot at least in action scenes)

I'll be interested having a look at your website yes (did I miss the URL? :D )

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by billou2k
What do you mean by deinterlacing your HD 1080i and mpeg2 captured clips? Do you mean for the playback on your computer screen or for reencoding in progressive? I de-interlace for playback on my TV screens.


Originally posted by billou2k
If you use your hardware card to play mpeg2 PAL interlaced videos on your TV then yes your clips will look great on your TV no doubt about it. I dont have one of these cards (although the matrox card does something similar) but I assume they are designed to play interlaced stuff (PAL) on TV unlike the usual 2d-3d cards who might have some full screen theater options but do not do things properly (at least for the nvidia card and drivers version I tried) I use a Sigma Xcard. Over the years I've found it provides an extremely accurate image from both interlaced and progressive sources, whether they be Mpeg1, 2 or 4. It's other big advantage is that it can output all three different types of component video (as well as S-video and composite) signals. I'm yet to find a graphics card (here in Europe) that can do the same level of connection. Although, I suppose all the big screen and graphics card manufactures are trying to force us all into using DVI, or some other form of digital connection.

Originally posted by billou2k
With most softwares players/decoders you can deactivate the auto deinterlacing (apart from wm9 and wmp9 apparently) so it makes it clear wether you are dealing with interlaced stuff or not. (and even deinterlaced show some typical artefacts that make them easy to spot at least in action scenes)) Yes, I use MediaPlayer Classic. And yes you can go into its settings and get it to display Mpeg interlaced content correctly. However it would be much better, if was able to display interlaced Mpeg4, WMV9 etc content correctly too (currently it plays all such streams progressively). And much better still if it was able to inform you of the true nature of the source file. If you find a software player that can do this, please let me know.

Originally posted by billou2k
I'll be interested having a look at your website yes (did I miss the URL? :D ) Just hit the 'WWW' button at the bottom of my post :D

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by Sagittaire
For me best video codec isn't WMV9. For me in order VP6, RV10, WMV9, XviD and DivX. But when some say "XviD is the best" or "WMV9 it's a big ****", it isn't the truth ...

You can say that with a straight face? Do you not understand why people have issue with you? Several times in this thread alone you say that "for you" WM9 is the best. And now you are saying it is not even second best "for you"? What is a person to think about someone who constatnly contradicts themselves? This seems to be a big problem with WM9 and Microsoft supporters in general. They can't get their stories straight or come up with any hard facts.

Originally posted by Sagittaire
It isn't because it's a micro$oft product which it's obligatorily the worst quality and it isn't because it's Open Source which it's obligatorily the best quality ...

This is a typical argument for someone who has no understanding of the real issues or their consequences. Being open or closed source tells you nothing in and of itself about the quality of a product. But the history of the company "can" tell you alot about all their work past present and future. Microsoft has a history of having notably inferior products. Microsoft has shown that for short periods they can distinguish themselves with a slightly superior product. But they can never sustain it. Right now for instance Internet Explorer is arguably one of the most inferior browsers on the market. Microsoft Office in terms of cost and performance is infinatly inferior in the face of things like Star Office or Open Office. Products that offer the same used functionality as MS Office but at 1/100th the cost or in the case of OpenOffice an infinantly less cost. Even Microsoft Windows is becomming more and more inferior by the day. Microsoft has never been known for writing quality programs. Or selling them at a fair market value for that matter. Microsoft software can best be described at best by the term adequate.

Originally posted by Valeron
Yes!You're right!

If only you knew how wrong you are.

Originally posted by Valeron
Though they can't post any comparison to proove so.

Actually we can. Actually you are posting on a site that has had several such comparisons. Actually it is one of the big draws of the site. How did you miss it? While were at it can you post a comparison to prove your point? A comparison that was not done or funded by Microsoft? A comparison that was not done by someone who does not know how to properly use the tools they used to write their comparison like sagittair? You are off to a bad start for a 6 post newb. I am sure you can do better.

Originally posted by Valeron
:D Cause M$!......
Perhaps Bill just as Hitler in their mind:
"He stole money from my pocket!"

I don't think anyone has accused bill of stealing. It just goes to show again how little you understand. He has not stolen money. Extorted yes. Stolen IP to earn it yes. Forced companies out of business with illegal business practices to earn it yes. But he has never stolen it directly. Are you really in China or are you just formely from there? Have you not been paying attention to what has been going on with Microsoft and the many governments along the asian contenet and places like Japan? Not they are unique. But they should be highly visible to someone from the area.

Originally posted by billou2k

@NeoNeko and SeeMoreDigital
Well the reason I dont want to play with deinterlacers is that I want to encode TV shows and true interlaced stuff and I plan to play it on TV through a video box (at the moment xbox) that can deal with interlaced materials the proper way.

Well even when it comes to TV shows about the only things that are true interlace are live broadcast. Of which I record very little. Most of the televised content I encounter is either telecined or not truly pure interlaced content. When encoding I always go for the best quality. Which can be dificult to achieve with true interlace material. But with anything else it only makes sense to deinterlace. My current equipment is not new enough or expensive enough to be able to natively handle progressive material propperly. But when I encode I go for longievity and quality. So it makes sense to deinterlace. Because someday I will have a high def plasma or LCD display and progressive material looks much better there. By deinterlacing I get the best of both worlds. Excelent quality and smaller size. But only where aplicable. And using software like ffmpeg and ffdshow it is actually not that hard to tweak it's output to make progressive material look as good as it did interlaced on TV. I have several ffpreset files for different material when output to TV.


Originally posted by billou2k

(For backuping films I just do it the usual way from my PAL dvds)
I played with deinterlacers and playing both the original (interlaced) on the TV and deinterlaced videos on the computer screen at the same time makes things clear than no deinterlacer (25fps) can compare with the interlaced stuff... its more smooth more clear more natural (though I hate the complications it involves:D )

What connectors are you using? The Xbox video out is better than the average Nvidia chipset which is piss poor without something like TV-tool. But your connector can still make a difference. Not to mention the playback equipment. In any even it seems silly to not deinterlace cinema material seeing as it is truly progressive material to begin with. As I said before your decoder can make a difference. To bad your Xbox AFAIK can't use ffdshow.

Originally posted by billou2k
Using WMEncoder (on a progressive video) with the maximum quality settings, it produces the wmv file faster (not 5 times but still significantly faster) than the vcm codec at max quality setting too. And then again it's difficult to understand... Even more now that I read from McoreD that vcm doesnt handle B frames at all...

Actually it should not be to hard to understand. Besides B frame usage there are other differences between the two. For instance one makes use of the VFW interface and the other the directshow interface. The VFW interface is a much older interface written for older computers. On top of that Microsof has not done any updates or matinance on it for years. Directshow is much newer and written for newer PCs. It is still relatively actively updated and maintained to a small extent. Of course newer interfaces are more likely to be optimised for newer hardware. But that is not all. IIRC under VFW codecs were more responsible for dealing with and performing color space conversions. Color space conversions can suck up CPU cycles. Especially if you have more than one. Under directshow that has been removed as a requirement for codecs. Some codecs still have it. But many don't. And that can offer significant speedups. It also allows things like color space conversions to be implemented separatly and reused. Which makes writing a single highly optimised converter for all codecs possible. And finally the code in the VCM and directshow versions is not identical. It could not be. Also the VCM version is an afterthought and kind of a bone Microsoft threw since so many people still use and rely on VFW. But directshow and the WM9 directshow components are a flagship product and get more attention.

Originally posted by Sagittaire
For me WMV9 is visualily better than MPEG4 ASP ...

WMV9 is better than MPEG4 ASP in tests PSNR/SSIM especially for low bitrates ...
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64789

You make the claim that WM9 is visually better and then link to a test that has no visual basis to try and prove your point? Are you purposefully trying to be misleading or do you honestly lack an understanding of what PSNR and SSIM are and how to use them. PSNR and SSIM are usefull as a tool and guide to help guage quality in an automated way. But higher PSNR or SSIM does not always give you higher visual quality. As such those graphs are interesting. But they don't prove anything in and of themselves. Untill such time as someone finds a way to mathematically describe and predict human perception which is more or less impossible. Such computerised mathematical models can't be used as any sort of definate measure. That in and of itself is a fundamental flaw of of most your arguments. I am not saying that WM9 is awful. Simply that you tend to overstate it.

[Valeron]

To Neo Neko:

I am no doubt from china.
How liittle I understand??I really can't reach your mean.
Of course,I have ever pay attention to the asian countries' job.
They(Korea,china&japan) try to join together to develop Linux to avoid Windows enter the goverments' dately used.Perhaps they will succeed.Any more?
For microsoft's behave:I have no words to say.The world was consist of infinite competetion.If it can win in the game,so as it never disobey the law.It will be the winner.Though it was pressured by the course from Europe at present.It really obey the law this time,but will 613 million$ forfeit really hurt M$?Its project will go on.
I am a man love power very much.M$ show me the power,so my goal is a place over it.
Some words out of this topic,perhaps some impolite words:
I don't think you have qualification to talk bussiness about china.
Cause you live in a country that you have the right to vote for president,but I haven't,chinese have never enjoy democracy as you always do.The goverment bussiness doesn't stands for any people's bussiness at all in china.Howerver,the goverment's benefit is based on exploiting chinese people's benefit at most time.Conclusion:A country under autarchy rule.

Of course I know doom9 is famous for its codec comparison.But I don't think it's dispassion enough.Though I like the result you show:by snapshot rather than machine-caculated result,such as PSNR and SSIM.In chnia,there's an adage:The fact is much stronger than words.
So I will try to do my codec comparsion.Of course,will follow your suggestion for XviD setting.I will try my best to make this comparison dispassion and objective enough.I will used best setting for each codec,and the setting will follow all of your guides.
I will also release result by snapshot rather then PSNR&SSIM and let everyone here can measure the best themselves.
Of course,lossless photo codec will be used.JPEG2000 maybe a good choice.
Perhaps M$ codec will win nobody finally.But I just need the fact.

Sorry for my poor English.I have try my best to improove it.

[Neo Neko]

ni hao
Originally posted by Valeron
To Neo Neko:

I am no doubt from china.
How liittle I understand??I really can't reach your mean.

Simply to me your atitude seemed and does seem different from what I would expect from someone comming from china. Or to put it bluntly your comments just seemed odd to me.

Originally posted by Valeron
Of course,I have ever pay attention to the asian countries' job.
They(Korea,china&japan) try to join together to develop Linux to avoid Windows enter the goverments' dately used.Perhaps they will succeed.Any more?

Yes they are doing that. But have you ever wondered why? Why not use Windows on government computers? There is more to it than just trying to avoid MS Windows. Avoiding MS Windows is the effect. It is more important to understand the cause.

Originally posted by Valeron
For microsoft's behave:I have no words to say.The world was consist of infinite competetion.If it can win in the game,so as it never disobey the law.It will be the winner.

That is a key issue though. They can not "win in the game" and not disobey the law. They have been found guilty at the state level several times here in the US. They have also been found guilty at the federal level. They have been and are being found guilty in industrialised countries across europe and asia. Japan has even raided Microsoft's offices in Japan due to Microsoft's violation of Japan's antitrust laws. Microsoft is best known for not competing. Avoiding competition. And destroying competition via unfair business practices funded by their monopoly.

Originally posted by Valeron
Though it was pressured by the course from Europe at present.It really obey the law this time,but will 613 million$ forfeit really hurt M$?Its project will go on.

They did not fine Microsoft half a billion dollars for nothing. Microsoft is guilty. But no it will not hurt Microsoft. They have made nearly 100 times that since the fine was announced.

Originally posted by Valeron
I am a man love power very much.M$ show me the power,so my goal is a place over it.

Remember. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Looking at how Microsoft has weilded their power as a whole the company is very corrupt. There are many good honest and skilled people who work for Microsoft. But unfortunatly the people in control give them a bad name since they are bullies, thieves, and liars. All of which has been proven in several courts several times.

Originally posted by Valeron
Some words out of this topic,perhaps some impolite words:
I don't think you have qualification to talk bussiness about china.
Cause you live in a country that you have the right to vote for president,but I haven't,chinese have never enjoy democracy as you always do.The goverment bussiness doesn't stands for any people's bussiness at all in china.Howerver,the goverment's benefit is based on exploiting chinese people's benefit at most time.Conclusion:A country under autarchy rule.

It was not my intention to be impolite. And I was talking business because I thought if anyone here would know, you being in china may have some actual insight. I understand and sympathise with where you are coming from when you speak of your government. And I suppose I can understand your views a bit if I take the Chinese government into account. But you could not have set me up a better lead in. You have issues with your government. It would only be unusual if you did not. But considder this. Everything you cite your government as guilty of. Microsoft is equaly guilty of. Actually Microsoft can be looked at as a miniature China after a fashion. Microsoft employs the most programmers in the world. Just as China has one of the largest populations in the world. China's government which you paint as only self interested not carring for the wellbeing of the average citizen is alot like Microsoft's upper management and their feelings towards their employees and the public in general. China is making slow progress. I would hate to see that negated by turning around and embracing a group very much like the one you are trying to escape.

Originally posted by Valeron
Of course I know doom9 is famous for its codec comparison.But I don't think it's dispassion enough.Though I like the result you show:by snapshot rather than machine-caculated result,such as PSNR and SSIM.In chnia,there's an adage:The fact is much stronger than words.

A picture is worth a thousand words?

Originally posted by Valeron
So I will try to do my codec comparsion.Of course,will follow your suggestion for XviD setting.I will try my best to make this comparison dispassion and objective enough.I will used best setting for each codec,and the setting will follow all of your guides.

Remember when it comes down to it there is no one best setting for most codecs. Unless we are talking Windows Media which only gives you roughly one setting and is highly unconfigurable. At least when compared to things like Xvid. ;)

Originally posted by Valeron
I will also release result by snapshot rather then PSNR&SSIM and let everyone here can measure the best themselves.

Well remember that even better than snapshot are clips. ;) Though clips can realy chew through a web sites bandwidth. :p

Originally posted by Valeron
Of course,lossless photo codec will be used.JPEG2000 maybe a good choice.

PNG might also be a good choice for your considderation. Not many people can view jpeg2000. But almost anyone can view PNG. :D

Originally posted by Valeron
Perhaps M$ codec will win nobody finally.But I just need the fact.

Facts are good. And if it wins on facts that is even better. Just remember it is not as easy as it seems. Doom9 spends weeks and months talking with codec developers and those experienced with the codecs to get the best individual settings for each movie/clip tested. It is not just point and click. Alot of people don't realise just how much work is involved in Doom9's tests. Or how hard he works to make each codec shine as bright as it can. He has no interest in handicaping codecs. Nor does he show favoritism. For a long time those of us that are open source fans secretly were upset that Doom9 kept recognising MSMPEG4v2&3 as the test winners. Doom9 does not play favorites. Xvid did not win simply because it is opensource. They worked long and hard and placed low in several of the shootouts before they finaly got a good review in the last one. And make no mistake that there are no garontees that Xvid will do well in the next shootout. That is why so many people read and even go by the results of Doom9's tests. But it is always best when people test for themselves.

Originally posted by Valeron
Sorry for my poor English.I have try my best to improove it.

You are doing far better with English than I could with Chinese. It is quite a complex and rich language with over 5000 kana. Though only about 1000 see common use. It is still a heck of alot more than our piddly 26 characters.

[Valeron]

To Neo Neko:
Thanks for your reply.This time I understand more from your words.
I'm sorry for my impolite words here.Just like US goverment,if there is no a workable international law to make it under control,no matter how corrupt and shabby it play in the game,just look at the result:it's the winner.So is M$.

Power really will lead to corrupt.Just like our goverment.So we need democracy law and system to avoid it.

About the clip I will use.I get no movie clip with me here but just some music video.Cause I am not at home and the DVD here is expensive.And a great amount are pirate.Perhaps I will get a region 1 movie DVD for source.(Of course,in legal way)So I can not get any good source movie here.But the music video are region 2 DVDs(NTSC) with copyright.A friend send me as a present.
If I could crop/resize the clip or encode it into original size?(720*480,which can not match the correct 4:3AR)
How can I measures the best setting for each clip with XviD encoding?In my opinion,it's really difficult to get the setting for XviD.Do you wanna to see some snaphot in order to give me some advice?Or I have to encode it with different setting for times and make the decision myself last:eek:?
And the other codecs' setting?
Is PNG a lossless codec?And how many size it could reduce from original BMP?Better than JPEG2000?Perhaps you should install a free trial edition ACDSee and a LWF plugin to see JPEG2000.
Though the clip is more useful,but I have no ftp or web space to store it.Perhaps Bit Torrent sharing is a good choice for your suggestion.

I really look forward to the result of the test.:D
Thanks.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by Valeron
To Neo Neko:
Thanks for your reply.This time I understand more from your words.
I'm sorry for my impolite words here.

I have found more often than not it is usually language barriers and not impoliteness. English is a rather goofy language when you look at the simplicity of many others. But it has a high penetration.

Originally posted by Valeron
Just like US goverment,if there is no a workable international law to make it under control,no matter how corrupt and shabby it play in the game,just look at the result:it's the winner.So is M$.

Actually MS is beginning to wear out. They have spawned their perfect competitor and it is making inroads to new markets faster than Microsoft can dominate em. And it is eroding away the hold MS has on it's dominant markets. Even as the river cuts mountains so will opensource wear away Microsoft. ;) It's all good. Microsoft has caused business to change. And not to their benefit. Long term outlook is good. Microsoft will be brought under control and China will get the government they deserve.

Originally posted by Valeron
About the clip I will use.I get no movie clip with me here but just some music video.Cause I am not at home and the DVD here is expensive.And a great amount are pirate.

So I hear. An aquaintance has picked up several while on business there. Usuall they are a disapointment. :p

Originally posted by Valeron
Perhaps I will get a region 1 movie DVD for source.(Of course,in legal way)So I can not get any good source movie here.

My view on region codes is that they should be illegal. :D They serve no real beneficial purpose. Perhaps you will start seeing some of those HK EDVDs show up soon. The ones with VP6 in high def.

Originally posted by Valeron
But the music video are region 2 DVDs(NTSC) with copyright.A friend send me as a present.

Actually music video are some of the harder clips to encode and much more taxing than the average movie. Quick cuts. Flashing lights. Fast pans and action. I know why doom9 does not use them in his tests. But they can still show codec weaknesses.

Originally posted by Valeron
If I could crop/resize the clip or encode it into original size?(720*480,which can not match the correct 4:3AR)
How can I measures the best setting for each clip with XviD encoding?In my opinion,it's really difficult to get the setting for XviD.Do you wanna to see some snaphot in order to give me some advice?Or I have to encode it with different setting for times and make the decision myself last:eek:?

That question might be better off in the Xvid forum. Some of the developers can be found there. Also Xvid.org. Those are the guys who helped Doom9 with his settings. Alot of times the default is pretty good. But when it does not work trial and error is good.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Valeron
[B]And the other codecs' setting?
Is PNG a lossless codec?And how many size it could reduce from original BMP?

PNG is lossless. It will cut the size of a BMP in half or less almost all the time. And depending on the material may achive a compression of 100 times or even more. But that is rare. The nice thing about them is that they can be viewed in any web page without any additional programs.

[billou2k]

I'm interested in a "dvd resolution" codec comparison too I ll have a look at the thread that was linked and see if I can help.

if McoreD or Sagitaire are still around (or anybody else ;-) ) could you point me at some document that explains the differences between the wm9 vcm and the wm9encoder?
By the way does vcm handles B frames or not? some people have said so but MCoreD didnt list it as a difference ?

Also is there really no way to deactivate the auto deinterlacing of wm9 content when playing it?

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by billou2k
I'm interested in a "dvd resolution" codec comparison too I ll have a look at the thread that was linked and see if I can help.

Which one? Sagittairs upscaled PSNR/SSIM thread?

Originally posted by billou2k
if McoreD or Sagitaire are still around (or anybody else ;-) ) could you point me at some document that explains the differences between the wm9 vcm and the wm9encoder?
By the way does vcm handles B frames or not? some people have said so but MCoreD didnt list it as a difference ?

The VCM codec does not support VFR or B frames. VFR is impossible with VFW. And B frames can oly be achieved under VFW will innovative workarounds/hacks which explains why the MS WM9 VCM codec has no B frames. Innovation that is.

Originally posted by billou2k
Also is there really no way to deactivate the auto deinterlacing of wm9 content when playing it?

There is no method exposed to the user AFAIK. Giving the user such simple choices is deemed not worth it by Microsoft. They considder the average user to be much to ignorant to deal with such a setting. There must be something in the registry though. But it will be burried and hidden. And I am not aware of anyone who has discovered it. You could encode without checking for interlace. With sufficient bitrate you will get the same quality without the deinterlacing feature. You could then use ffdshows ability to postprocess raw video along with it's aray of deinterlacing facilities as you choose. And eventually you should be able to use ffdshow directly to decode WMV 9 completely bypassing Microsoft's own decoder since it is highly lacking. WM9 encoding with ffdshow is already possible. And it encodes faster than Microsoft's own WMV 9 encoder on my PC.

[billou2k]

Which one? Sagittairs upscaled PSNR/SSIM thread?

No;-) my mistake... I was thinking about the HD encoding actually:D
SeeMoreDigital told me it was still alive so I'll look around whats happening there.

Thanks for conforming the differences between the VCM and the encoder then... That should make quite a difference quality wise not to have the B frames... hmm I gonna test if it's visible...
(And sorry to ask again but is there a document or a page somewhere from microsoft that lists the differences?)

About the deinterlacing.. I had a look at the registery also around the pp settings but I couldnt find anything related to deinterlacing.
However I discovered that using the prehistoric WMP6.4 the video would not be deinterlaced!... but its got colour artefacts;-)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by billou2k
...About the deinterlacing.. I had a look at the registery also around the pp settings but I couldnt find anything related to deinterlacing.
However I discovered that using the prehistoric WMP6.4 the video would not be deinterlaced!... but its got colour artefacts;-) I recently generated some field tests encodes, from a known Mpeg2 interlaced source, with WMV9 VCM, using the codecs own 'Pre-Processing' settings - ie: Encode Frames Progressive / De-interlace Frames and Encode / Encode Interlaced Frames.

Although I have not yet found an 'software player' that's able display the interlaced fields correctly I can confirm that WMV9 VCM is able to encode interlaced content correctly. I managed to confirm this by sending the video output to an CRT TV.

For a copy of the encodes please visit Area 51 of my web site and go to A/V Set Up Tests.

Cheers

[IgorC]

Not so bad for WMV 9. Divx 5.1.1 is worst of all, Xvid a little better. RV 10 is so smooth.

I think WMV9 and VP6.2 are best

It s my first message in forum.doom9 :devil:

[IgorC]

http://www.sepultura.com.br/video/040416-SEPULTURA-Limeira.wmv - look this one