Xvid as an I-frame archiving codec

[TEB]

Hi. Im curious if Xvid is a good option for archiving of digital material compared to mpeg2 CQ ? I need 4:2:2 support. and a very high quality close to lossless. Like Mjpeg 2:1 or something..
Is Xvid in quant1, no b-frames with extras, gonna give the best quality for Archiving? We're talking similar to mpeg2 IMX og 50mbit CQ.

Apriciate any answers.

best regards teb

[Manao]

I need 4:2:2 supportForget XviD and any MPEG-4 codec then.

[RadicalEd]

Forget XviD and any MPEG-4 ASP codec then.
;)

[PaulKroll]

Are you looking to save space, or why exactly do you want to use Xvid instead of the aforementioned MPEG2 high-bitrate critter?

I mean, there is LOSSLESS (Huffyuv, FFV1 supports other colorspaces than YV12 yes?) available if you really want it, and have the space. (These days, that's not ideal, but with the price of 200 gig drives, it's possible.)

[TEB]

Well space is a great factor here.. We're talking about several houndred hours of film from Digibeta. That medium is origionally 4:2:2.. So my questions is really is mpeg4 asp a better i-frame only codec than mpeg2 ? Or does it only get its quality from all the other frame types, more advanced gop structures and so on?

teb

[Ark]

If you plan to re-utilize this material in future, I strongly suggest you to rely on a standard, tested and vastly supported format (like mpeg2), XviD could do better looking results, but it's not a standard and is in continuous developing stage, and for such a huge amount of (very important I guess) material, It's best to think in terms of "reusability", at least for me :)

I work in a "video-editing studio" (I don't know the exact name in english...), and we do archive our movies or in Betacam/DVCPro format, or in DVD's, (although for me DVD is a significant loss in quality compared to Betacam/DVCPro), but on the other hand, DVD-format is very popular, I can easily take a video from it and edit it, but in a XviD format it's not that easy!

[Manao]

XviD isn't a standardWHAT ?

XviD is a codec which follows MPEG-4 norm, so it is as much a standard as an MPEG-2 codec is.

[Ark]

Originally posted by Manao
WHAT ?

XviD is a codec which follows MPEG-4 norm, so it is as much a standard as an MPEG-2 codec is.

I meant that it's not a standard for editing, and usually if you want to archive something is for future editing, and for this reason XviD is not recommended for me!

Sorry for not clarifiyng better this! :)

[Manao]

I still disagree strongly : on my system, I can far more easily edit mpeg-4 content than mpeg-2.

[Ark]

Well, I was too fast making that post, in fact I was referring to "professional" world, where MPEG4 for editing is non-existant, well only for final encodes of material (like video for web), but MPEG2 I-frame is supported by several non linear-editing program (I use Adobe Pemiere Pro, which support MPEG2 I-frame foe editing), while MPEG4 (so XviD too) is not.

Maybe I've wrongly "recognised" in a professional domain this thread, so I've replied accordingly (but Digibeta isn't for sure a "consumer" format...)... but like Manao says, if you (TEB) aren't in a professional environment, you can use XviD if you want, quality-wise is better than MPEG2 (for me), and there are many freeware programs (like VDub) that allows you to edit it!

[TEB]

Hi. Well in my case its in the PRO world. I dont need to edit the material afterwards but its gonna be the source for various encoding apps like Canopus Procoder Station and such..
The customer wants to store stuff in 4:2:2 because of using the material later on in E-cinemas and stuff..
So if mpeg4 could do the same job as mpeg2 in a CQ mode or I-frame only mode i would be happy. Pref i would store it in a lossless compressed codec but i cannot find any good and STABLE ones yet that supports better container types than avi..
My dream setup would be some kindof Lossless compressed 4:2:2 codec that has support for interframe compression in lossless mode and stored in a MXF container.. That woulda rocked !:)

teb

[gamaD]

Back to TEB's second question, I-frame-only MPEG-2 VS I-frame-only MPEG-4, which gives more quality/byte?

And for non-proworld archiving, since I heard that Xvid Q2 gives visualy (not mathematicaly) identical content to the original with smaller filesize than enything else, isn't it the best method of archiving large amounts of video?

[spyder]

AFAIK there's not a whole lot to be gained using MPEG4 over MPEG2 with only I frames. Add in the fact that he wants to keep the 4:2:2 colorspace, I say use MPEG2.