XviD 1.0.x encodes too big? Try a different 'overflow treatment'!

[LigH]

A few times we already got reports that XviD encodes sometimes (rather rarely, depending on the bitrate - more often at high bitrates >~ 1000 kbps) get too big.

http://forum.gleitz.info/showthread.php?t=15756
http://forum.gleitz.info/showthread.php?t=15906

Selur - many thanks for his very detailed german XviD guide "Wissenswertes rund um XviD (http://www.flaskmpeg.info/board/thread.php?sid=&postid=46975)" (mirror (http://gmb.shellmaster.de/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6))- recommended to use higher "Overflow treatment" values, around 10. This could avoid such wrong filesizes.

It is only one possible reason, but at least worth a try.

[Koepi]

That solution got mentioned always when a "oversize issue" thread got up.

For more precise results you should in q1-enabled/saturated encodes use 20% as overflow values, 10% sometimes don't suffice.

Regards
Koepi

[Didée]

BTW, has anyone ever tried "overflow control strength = 0 (let xvid core decide)" ?

(I haven't, either)

[stephanV]

that would be useful werent it that XviD usually undersizes for me (at lower bitrates, at least)... and i dont mean saturation. could be something wrong with the rate control.

[LigH]

@ Koepi:

Sorry - I probably did not search long enough for "overflow" and "treatment"; must have missed other threads pointing that out already.:o

[Aktan]

Originally posted by Didée
BTW, has anyone ever tried "overflow control strength = 0 (let xvid core decide)" ?

(I haven't, either)

I have and the files sizes are on target. But i'm not sure it is becuase of that setting...

[Selur]

So, when it's time to go from 0 to 20 to reach the size on normal sources at datarates 1000k+, it might be time to change the default values or better the inside code.

Personally I think it's nice if the default normally stay at 0. :)

Cu Selur