Question on the script

[guada 2]

I wondered if a script agreed better or not to a codec.
Why this question.
I am a fan of the high fidelity audio, and we know it the marriage of the sources is very important to the basis.
And for the script, it is similar.

Something else, would an IIP script agree him in the Xvid codec, wmv or to the rv10?

[Wilbert]

What do you mean by "a script agree with a codec"?

[guada 2]

I'w sorry Wilbert, I am not very good in English :(

I wondered if a script suited a codec better rather than another.
It is for it that I chose the example of the HF audio.

Because, i noted that the script of Didée suited better to the RV10 codec : a marriage Smoothing and precision of the conversion video.

And you what do you think about it?

[guada 2]

Is it (that) a codec prefers a script rather than another ?

It seemed derisory, but I would like to know, Thank you.

Note: my engish is crappy, sorry

[Kagura]

Yes, different codecs work best with different sources. DivX tends to blur. WMV9 smoothes even more. RV10 has its own kind of smoothing. XviD is a good balance of sharpness and smoothing.

In general, adjust your level of detail and sharpening to suit the codec. Since XviD by default doesn't smooth as much as other codecs, you should clean up the noise more than you would otherwise when working woth other codecs. For WMV9, you would jack up the sharpening to compensate for the codec's internal smoothing.

[guada 2]

Thank you Kagura for the information. :)

If I understand well, a script "perfects" is not adapted necessarily to a codec.

But a thing challenges me, let's take the example of the Hifi: several sources of quality don't deliver the sound "perfects".
Then, what do you think about of the scripts in general?

[Kagura]

Hmm... I might not understand your question (you can pm me in french if you want ;))

If I understand well, a script "perfects" is not adapted necessarily to a codec.

I'll take the "perfect script" as taking something from an analog source and spitting out dvd-level quality. I think for a script to be as close to perfect as possible, it needs to consider the codec. One needs an intricate understanding of the codec which compresses to know how it will touch the source after you have filtered it.

But a thing challenges me, let's take the example of the Hifi: several sources of quality don't deliver the sound "perfects".

Yes, many supposedly high quality sources can deliver bad results. Example, DVDs that you don't telecide correctly, interlaced crap, etc. Also, multiple analog conversions can degrade what is normally a very high quality source.

Then, what do you think about of the scripts in general?

Scripts right now need to be tailored to the source 100%. That means different filters for different sections, per frame fixing, and zones in xvid (if you're using that). 50% of the quality is a result of filtering and 50% is from the codec compression (I should say lack of it), assuming a medium quality analog source.

EDIT: I just saw your original question. While not claiming to be an expert on IIP, I'll say that it is probably most suited to XviD, then WMV, then RV. However, my knowledge of the latter two codecs comes mostly from reading and not so much actual experimentation. The reason, however, is that IIP does a balanced job of not leaving many artifacts. In that situation, XviD gives the best "preservation" of the source among all three of those codecs. It doesn't smooth by default as much.

[guada 2]

You are right to say that the Xvid codec is very good.
But I found that IIP suited better with the RV10 , because the script of Didée is very precise, The stages are retailed in all points.
Whereas the RV10 brings smoothing and a pleasant fluidity to the eye.

This couple to match perfectly , especially for the low bitrates
It's my personal opinion.

Note: what a pity that French is not quoted better on languages.
Je te remercie pour ton commentaire en anglais: Sorry,

To soon ;)

[Kagura]

Does it now? Please disregard what I've said then. I have very limited (basically none) experience using IIP with RV.

For low bitrates, of course RV will dominate. It is designed for low. XviD is best for medium bitrate, unless one adjusts the tuning for 2nd pass for good quality ~ 50% of first pass.

Now going off topic on the language discussion ;):

English is, unfortunately, the dominant language because of its technical vocabulary. Very few other languages, in my experience, have the amount and level of terms made to describe new scientific advances. If there are, they are not favoured because English coined them first. Now, in open-source development, all of us speak English, even if we're from the same country because of the terms and also because it is standardized.

Now the best way to speak in English is not to translate directly from your native language, like you did with "a bientot" hehe.

I don't think English has the literal equivalent.