athos ffdshow 20040508 vs ffvfw 20040113

[FredThompson]

I cannot, for the life of me, figure out where I got ffvfw 20040113.

Nonetheless, is there a reason to use it? Am I correct in believing that all ffvfw was folded into ffdshow and athos has taken over development?

btw, fast MPEG2 decoding with support for the extra flags would be super cool...

[Tommy Carrot]

No, still Milan is the developer, and if i remember correctly he merged the 2 projects for easier maintenance. No reason to keep ffvfw, tha latest ffdshow should have all of its functionalities (+ a lot more).

[bond]

basically milan renamed the encoder, which was known as ffvfw till now, to "ffdshow" (altough the encoder has nothing to do with directshow :B )

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by bond
basically milan renamed the encoder, which was known as ffvfw till now, to "ffdshow" (altough the encoder has nothing to do with directshow :B ) And how much more confusing has that decision made things?

Given that this new 'joint' package encodes and decodes, why didn't he just call it something like FFcodec!

But what do I know :cool:


Cheers

[stephanV]

ffvfw is/was also a decoder, so now suddenly the name 'ffdshow' shows up in the compression menu of VDub and you can even decode with it (but it really is 'just' ffvfw). took me a day to grasp that idea :)

[athos]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
And how much more confusing has that decision made things?

Given that this new 'joint' package encodes and decodes, why didn't he just call it something like FFcodec!

But what do I know :cool:


Cheers
That was acutally a good suggestion, ffcodec.

and the posts above are correct: ffdshow and ffvfw are merged; milan is still the developer; i just compile builds.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by athos
That was acutally a good suggestion, ffcodec.

and the posts above are correct: ffdshow and ffvfw are merged; milan is still the developer; i just compile builds. Thanks athos for the reply,

I have to say I've been greatly impressed with the current builds and enjoy using them.

Am I correct in thinking that the ffvfw encoder managed to beat both XviD and 3ivX with Mpeg4 anamorphic encoding?


Cheers

[Soulhunter]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
Given that this new 'joint' package encodes and decodes, why didn't he just call it something like FFcodec!
:goodpost: n' idear... ;)


Bye

[bond]

tough it would be nice to have a common name for both (well it exists already: ffmpeg ;) ) i think its maybe too late for renaming ffdshow without heavily confusing all the newbies out there
i think both the dshow decoder and vfw de/encoder are known already as ffdshow and ffvfw and both names also make sense, dunno why not simply combine them to one package (labelled as ffdshow or ffvfw) and still name one ffvfw and one ffdshow :confused:

[FredThompson]

...and the confusino of releasing an updated ffvfw after it was supposedly rolled into ffdshow.

it's not too late to change the name. Why would organizational progress be stopped because of the theoretical confusion of newbies? Nothing else in the world works like that, not if it survives.

[bond]

Originally posted by FredThompson
it's not too late to change the name. Why would organizational progress be stopped because of the theoretical confusion of newbies? Nothing else in the world works like that, not if it survives.well i wouldnt call the decision of what name to use an organisational progress :D

still i fear all the newbies questions of "wtf is ffcodec now, i read on some board i should use ffdshow", "why has ffdshow development stopped" aso...

[stephanV]

if they just make an announcement about it, i dont see a problem. there will always be newbies who will confuse things (e.g. divx with avi). sooner or later they will get it :)

[FredThompson]

yeah, I couldn't think of an appropriate phrase...

There will always be people who complain/are confused. No big deal. Renaming doesn't automatically mean there's no clear notification of the change. People going to Milan's page would probably assume development stopped quite a while ago.

I'm trying to point out that not doing something out of concern for the confusion of the lowest common denominator or newbies isn't a good way to make a decision. ffdshow really isn't a beginer's thing anyhow. That's the point I was trying to communicate.

The only reason I can see for changing it is the DirectShow reference. I really don't care myself.

A new name would be a great way to usher in a major update, though. There are some decoders which are broken (MPEG2) and some other things might be nice to roll in. Yeah, maybe a new name and appearance would be useful.

[bond]

well for people who know the stuff a name means nothing, for newbies it means everything

still its milan's decision how to name his tools, lets leave it up to him ;)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by bond
...tough it would be nice to have a common name for both (well it exists already: ffmpeg ;) ) i think its maybe too late for renaming ffdshow without heavily confusing all the newbies out there... The main reason why I thought 'ffcodec' would be better, is because the word 'codec' makes it clear that the application includes both an 'encoder' and an 'decoder'

I was hoping that most newbies would find it less confusing. Especially brand 'new' newbies. But I take your point, some 'not-so-new' (or transitional) newbies might find it confusing!

Anyway, given that all future versions of 'ff' will offer incredible encoding and decoding functionallity... I personally think the name will have to change to reflect this.

And just to confuse matters :rolleyes: Will future versions still be able to generate Mpeg4 streams with current 'FVFW' 4CC?


I... thank you!

[bill_baroud]

talking about newbies, i think they don't give a f*** about to have an encoder :) what they want is to play their movies.

now, let's ask : there is no way to just have a mpeg4 decoder, with some filters, a ffdshow lite ? there is no need of theora or wmv9 decoding or 50 blurring filters ... a nice lite & stable mpeg4 decoder would be really great ;)

[FredThompson]

mpeg2 and mpeg4 decoding with some basic filters (kernal deinterlace, subtitle, audio boost, track selection, user-definable black overlay to clean up ragged edges, auto-AR, etc.) would be great.

[avih]

ffdvfw? ;)

[FredThompson]

How about "WinZip"? It's kinda catchy...

"itworks" codec


"multidecodec"

[stephanV]

"just-install-this-and-be-done-with-it"-codec ;)

but seriously, why is the name 'libavcodec' never used? or is that too indeterminate?

[marcellus]

Hi @ all!
I'm definitely PRO for a "codec" like name because the name is really important in (un)confusing people.
FFvfw is encoding mpeg2 with libavcodec for ages but I didn't see so far so many people interested about it as I seen in QuEnc's thread (and IMHO ffvfw is more flexible and mature right now than QuEnc) -so I assume that many people don't even know. Although I'm very interested about encoding features of ffdshow I never knew where to post my questions/findings/opinions/requests, the main ffdshow developement thread is mainly about decoding and the few questions about encoding are almost ignored and ffvfw thread is obsolete - since ffvfw doesn't exist anymore. Even a very simple sentence about ffdshow encoding features ("formerly known as" ffvfw) gets very complicated.
bye
marcellus

[Stux]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
Am I correct in thinking that the ffvfw encoder managed to beat both XviD and 3ivX with Mpeg4 anamorphic encoding?


Don't think so

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by Stux
Don't think so When did your first version come out Stux?