Hello!
Unlike the slower x265, the divx265 has not persuasive quality for me. What do you think about it? Is it worse than x264 2-pass options?
Try StreamFab Downloader and download from Netflix, Amazon, Youtube! Or Try DVDFab and copy Blu-rays! or rip iTunes movies!
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 30 of 55
Thread
-
Last edited by Stears555; 6th Jul 2014 at 07:44.
-
Here is an ut video file (2GB) here: https://docs.zoho.com/file/mb9ur17b7c07c2e3040b5aa30a3cba4e2f5c3 Try with that! The fruits has a lot of details.
-
http://www.dictaphone.atw.hu/divx265.mp4 and http://www.dictaphone.atw.hu/x264.flv
Divx was coded as "higher quality" x264 was encoded as 2pass "slow"Last edited by Stears555; 6th Jul 2014 at 10:20.
-
Will honestly look at DivX265/2-pass/Psy-RD - give a little indulgence
Then for approximation > x265/abr/Psy-RD vs x264/abr/Psy-RD ? > https://forum.videohelp.com/showthread.php?t=365014 -
@Stears555,
Firefox does not want to download your files ... can spread to another place? And do not hesitate to give the originals -
-
Download Master also does not download! Often faced with european and american sites
We can not be opened http://www.livejournal.com/ because of terrorist propaganda and slander -
Also, DECENT web browsers can be configured to *always save* this or that file type
Even better, why not use a «better-known» filesharing service
And now that my resistance is futile , you can even use mega.co.nz
But please keep avoiding oboom like the plague -
are you smoking some of that really good budapest source stuff again?
the title of your thread is "X.264 AVC is better than DIVX265 HEVC. A TEST which proved it.DEAL WITH" which to me suggests that you would be offering some test encodes that supposedly would prove that x264 was better than divx265 and yet your entire opening post is:
Hello!
Unlike the slower x265, the divx265 has not persuasive quality for me. What do you think about it? Is it worse than x264 2-pass options?
i hope you two are very happy together. -
i just did a quick encode for you using the Sintel 720p24 lossless trailer as source for you.
one is divx265 with the "better quality" setting and one os x264, very slow preset and 2 pass. the divx encode was done at 25fps, the 2nd pass of the x264 encode was done at 12fps (remember the first pass is just an analysis pass), to me the x264 encode looks like garbage compared to the source, this is one of those times when to my eyes all the psy-rd optimizations absolutely kill the image, especially in the girl's face and the dragon and the colors in general.
it should also be noted that the divx encoder undershot the target bit rate of 4mb/s by about 600kb/s and it still produce the better encode, so you DEAL WITH THAT! -
and it still produce the better encode, so you DEAL WITH THAT!
Doing a quick look, they look nearly identical to me using:
Code:LoadCPlugin("G:\Hybrid\avisynthPlugins\ffms2.dll") # loading source v1 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 divx265 higher quality.mp4").SubTitle("Divx265").ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=40, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) v2 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 x264 very slow 2 pass.mp4").SubTitle("x264").ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=40, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) v3 = Subtract(v1, v2).Levels(127, 1, 129, 0, 255) StackHorizontal(v1, StackHorizontal(v2,v3))
But something is off with the coloring it's different for both encodes, might be a labling/decoding problem.
Also in most of the scenes where you can clearly see the red hair to me it looks better (more detailed) in the x264 encode.
(btw. funny thing is that I first mislabled the files and nearly posted the exact opposite)
Cu Selur -
@Selur:
using the latest vlc build to evaluate the clips, the old man's beard, to my eyes, looks a lot worse on x264 vs divx, the girls face compared to divx and the original looks horrible and we need to keep in my this is the second slowest setting for x265, that's with all the goodies enabled that people claim gives x264 supernatural capabilities, mb-tree, aq, psy-rd, trellis, psy-trellis, all the b options, all of it and it's a 2 pass encode and it used 600kb/s more bit rate.
look at the girl's and dragon's face in the original and compare against my test encodes, x264 doesn't come near to divx.
i also decided to test with -qp 11 which resulted in a bit rate of 4103kbps, as you can see at similar bit rates x264, even with 2 pass and the slowest settings, can't keep up.Last edited by deadrats; 6th Jul 2014 at 17:59.
-
i also decided to test with -qp 11 which resulted in a bit rate of 4103kbps, as you can see at similar bit rates x264, even with 2 pass and the slowest settings, can't keep up.
------------
to my eyes, looks a lot worse on x264 vs divx, the girls face compared to divx and the original looks horrible
Converted the scene to lagarigth, using:
Code:LoadCPlugin("G:\Hybrid\avisynthPlugins\ffms2.dll") # loading source v1 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 divx265 higher quality.mp4").Crop(0,88,1280,544).SubTitle("Divx265").ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=40, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) v2 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 x264 very slow 2 pass.mp4").Crop(0,88,1280,544).SubTitle("x264").ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=40, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) StackHorizontal(v1, v2)
Code:LoadPlugin("G:\Hybrid\avisynthPlugins\AGC.dll") LoadCPlugin("G:\Hybrid\avisynthPlugins\ffms2.dll") # loading source v1 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 divx265 higher quality.mp4").Crop(0,88,1280,544).HDRAGC(debug=0).SubTitle("Divx265").ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=40, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) v2 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 x264 very slow 2 pass.mp4").Crop(0,88,1280,544).HDRAGC(debug=0).SubTitle("x264").ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=40, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) StackHorizontal(v1, v2)
To be frank, the main thing that I see there is that the clips use different colors, but I wouldn't dare to try to say that (under normal viewing conditions) one clip looks better than the other in that scene. All differences which jump out to me are due to the colors.
Regarding: 'people claim gives x264 supernatural capabilities'
Sorry, but I have never seen any people claiming that, but even if someone did and traumatized you, you could show here that they are wrong and that DivX265 is better.
Btw. I really hope that H.265 implementation (not only at low bit rates) will beat all H.264 implementations, but to me so far it doesn't seem to be the case atm.
Cu Selur -
Hi Wruckler,
You know that the kernel / seeds from pits apricots (peaches, plums, cherries and other plants) can cure cancer?
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m18y3keyNjY
> http://www.cytopharmaonline.com/en/ -
I've noticed that 10bit wins on dark video, but he loses the bright scenes (eats bitrate).
I am confident that the new UHD-BD /12bit (powerful source) strongly improves coding and give the second breath video compression.Last edited by Gravitator; 7th Jul 2014 at 06:46.
-
sample "deadrats_scene_HDRAGC.avi " - DivX not consider the scene change and get a SHOCK!!!
A similar problem > Click
@Selur,
Сan do now to show the class of the frame (I, P, B) and a demonstration now x265 vs DivX ?Last edited by Gravitator; 7th Jul 2014 at 09:10.
-
Why not lay out samples (original, encoded) for analysis? - let developers DivX correct probe error
-
@Graviator:
a. Why did you distort the image to 1920x1080 and introduce resizing artifacts?
b. Did you understand why I wrote '(with HDRAGC, you can clearly see the problems DivX265 has with smooth backgrounds, but since the is not really visible during normal playback I wouldn't call it a problem' ?
If you see these problems during normal playback you must really have to mis-configured system.
-> From my point of view it's a mistake to look at these artifacts.
Сan do now to show the class of the frame (I, P, B)
Code:LoadCPlugin("G:\Hybrid\avisynthPlugins\ffms2.dll") Import("G:\Hybrid\avisynthPlugins\FFMS2.avsi") LoadPlugin("G:\Hybrid\avisynthPlugins\ColorMatrix.dll") # loading source v1 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 divx265 higher quality.mp4").Crop(0,88,1280,544).FFInfo().SubTitle("Divx265", x=10, y = 120).ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=100, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) v2 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 x264 very slow 2 pass.mp4").Crop(0,88,1280,544).FFInfo().SubTitle("x264", x=10, y = 120).ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=100, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) StackHorizontal(v1, v2)
and a demonstration now x265 vs DivX ? -
When I want to compare things like this I interleave the original video, the two encoded videos and the original video again:
Code:v0=ffVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24.y4m", seekmode=0).Subtitle("source") v1=ffVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 divx265 higher quality.mp4", seekmode=0).Subtitle("divx265") v2=ffVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 x264 very slow 2 pass.mp4", seekmode=0).Subtitle("x264") Interleave(v0,v1,v2,v0)
Doing this with the videos provided by deadrats shows that x264 is closer to the original than divx265 in almost every frame. The latter shows loss of most small, low contrast details. Here's an example, 8x point enlargement:
original:
divx265:
x264:
Last edited by jagabo; 7th Jul 2014 at 08:22.
-
Why not lay out samples (original, encoded) for analysis? - let developers DivX correct probe error
Source: (mentioned by deadrats in this thread)
- https://media.xiph.org/video/derf/y4m/sintel_trailer_2k_720p24.y4m
Reencodes: (posted by deadrats in this thread)
- https://forum.videohelp.com/attachments/26161-1404666855/sintel_trailer_2k_720p24%20div...%20quality.mp4
- https://forum.videohelp.com/attachments/26162-1404666855/sintel_trailer_2k_720p24%20x26...202%20pass.mp4
Compared the scene deadrats mentioned:
a. using:
Code:LoadCPlugin("G:\Hybrid\avisynthPlugins\ffms2.dll") # loading source v1 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 divx265 higher quality.mp4").Crop(0,88,1280,544).SubTitle("Divx265").ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=40, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) v2 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 x264 very slow 2 pass.mp4").Crop(0,88,1280,544).SubTitle("x264").ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=40, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) StackHorizontal(v1, v2)
and
b. using:
Code:LoadPlugin("G:\Hybrid\avisynthPlugins\AGC.dll") LoadCPlugin("G:\Hybrid\avisynthPlugins\ffms2.dll") # loading source v1 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 divx265 higher quality.mp4").Crop(0,88,1280,544).HDRAGC(debug=0).SubTitle("Divx265").ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=40, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) v2 = FFVideoSource("sintel_trailer_2k_720p24 x264 very slow 2 pass.mp4").Crop(0,88,1280,544).HDRAGC(debug=0).SubTitle("x264").ShowFrameNumber(x=20, y=40, font="Arial", size=24, text_color=$ff0000) StackHorizontal(v1, v2)
----
@jagabo: I agree if you compare to the source frame-by-frame interleave often offers faster insight. I didn't use it since I didn't want to download the source and without the source interleave seemed silly. -
Not sure what you are asking for everything is here in this thread,....Source: (mentioned by deadrats in this thread)
- https://media.xiph.org/video/derf/y4m/sintel_trailer_2k_720p24.y4m
Reencodes: (posted by deadrats in this thread)
- https://forum.videohelp.com/attachments/26161-1404666855/sintel_trailer_2k_720p24%20div...%20quality.mp4
- https://forum.videohelp.com/attachments/26162-1404666855/sintel_trailer_2k_720p24%20x26...202%20pass.mp4
Why did you distort the image to 1920x1080 and introduce resizing artifacts?
sample "deadrats_scene_HDRAGC.avi " - DivX not consider the scene change and get a SHOCK!!!Last edited by Gravitator; 7th Jul 2014 at 09:12.
-
now this isn't fair at all, the fact of the matter is that with a really high quality source and enough bit rate mpeg-2 will match avc and i would go as far as to say that at SD resolutions mpeg-2 can match avc even at lower bit rate, so long as you use a really good mpeg-2 encoder, like cce or procoder or hanks'.
h265 will really start pulling away from avc when we start playing around with 4k, in fact let me download an high quality y4m 4k source and run a few UHD tests and post them here. -
Come on. Calling me unfair, after I asked you where you think that the sample you provided and encoded was beating x264s output, then looked at the sample and found that DivX265 lacks in quality even in the scene that you selected.
with a really high quality source and enough bit rate
h265 will really start pulling away from avc when we start playing around with 4k, ...
a. there are no quality 4k displays in my price range.
b. the availability of 4k content isn't that great
in fact let me download an high quality y4m 4k source and run a few UHD tests and post them here. -
It's all subjective, really. You could get all three encoders to produce the same quality file depending on what settings you use.
The question is "which encoder at those settings produces that file in the least amount of time?"
VideoEnc: x264 core:142 r2409 d6b4e63
--crf 17 --preset medium --tune film --demuxer raw --input-csp i420 --input-res %(width)x%(height) --fps %(fpsnum)/%(fpsden) -o "%(tempvideofile)" -
encoded 360 frames, 4.88 fps, 7193.93 kb/s, 12.9 MB
VideoEnc: DivX 265/HEVC Encoder version 1.3.0.74
-qp 8 -I 5 -fps %(fpsnum)/%(fpsden) -i - -o "%(tempvideofile)" -aqo 3 -s %(width)x%(height) -v
encoded 360 frames, 3.2 fps, 7152.53 kb/s, 12.8 MB
VideoEnc: x265 HEVC encoder version 1.1+250-1dc27824bde1
--preset ultrafast --qp 9 --input-res %(width)x%(height) --fps %(fps) - -o "%(tempvideofile)"
encoded 360 frames, 3.16 fps, 7238.80 kb/s, 13.0 MB
Click Image twice to show full resolution -
-
Until this day, there are no real 4K camcorders, due to the lack of good quality hardware HEVC encoder. The visible resolution of an average 4K camcorder is similar to a good quality 1080p camcorder, or it is only a bit slightly better. (4K camcorders produce only 1100 lw/ph visible resolution, a better 1080p handcam produce 1000 lw/ph visible resolution.) Until the appearance of a good real 4K HEVC camcorders, I will not use 4K displays and I will not edit 4K videos.