Whats so bad about Divx??

[e-z-e]

i hear divx called garbage all the time. i have heard it blamed on high compression, amongst other things. i just want to know what else makes divx "garbage"? also, i'd like to know an alternate source i could use to obtain better quality.
Thanking you in advance,
e-z-e

[vitualis]

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with "DivX" (except for perhaps its illegal past).

The video quality of a well made DivX video file can be excellent, especially for the degree of compression used. However, there are a lot of poorly made DivX files out on the net and this has lead it its bad reputation from some -- especially if you intend to further encode to VCD/SVCD.

There are some other complications in converting DivX to VCD/SVCD as well depending on the individual file.

The best source for creating VCD/SVCD would be a DVD rip.

Regards.

[JCPicache]

it's not that MP4 (divx) is such a bad compression. it's actually quite good, maybe better than MPEG at lower bitrates.

the thing is, Divx is a good 'presentation' codec, while MPEG is a good 'archival' codec. meaning, while Divx looks good for the user, it's actually throwing away a LOT of information along the way. thus, it's 'garbage' when used as an input for an encoder such as TMPGenc.

not quite sure this was helpful, but that's how i understand it.

[vitualis]

Umm... to use your terminology, BOTH DivX and MPEG-1/2 video are "presentation" codecs. Both are very lossy.

An "archival" video format would be like an lossless AVI codec like HuffyUV.

Regards.

[e-z-e]

so what source do you say i use? dvd->svcd? i don't have a dvd drive on my computer though.

[dvbr]

Hi,

I agree with vitualis, but I think there no way make a "decent" archive without spending a lot of money.
I use to capture (720x480 NTSC) from with PCTV and it generates about 30 GB per hour. Compressing with HuffyUV will give at best 10~15 GB per hour, so we need to use DLT or similar to store a 2 hour video, very expensive. The only economic way is to compress with a lossy compressor.

As opposite JCPicache said, I use Divx to archive, 640x480 at high bitrates (at least for Divx, 1500~3000kbps are high) and recording into CD-R. And SVCD to present on a standalone DVD player.

Regards

[dvbr]

Sorry guys, I made a mistake, I capture already compressed with the HuffyUV, so the case is worse: per hour I have 30 GB, 2 hours can full a DLT tape.


regards

[homerpez]

The problem with DivX 3.1, the "illegal past" as it's being referred to here... was that there were 2 codecs available, a High-Motion and a Low Motion. No matter how hard you culd try, no codec (or combination thereof) got flawless results.

With the DivX 4 codec(s), I see some pretty good improvements. I even saw a couple movies that were of good enough quality they could be easily made into a good VCD or SVCD (an encode of Shrek I remember was one).

I notice it is MUCH harder to configure DivX than it is MPEG, and guess the outcome. But maybe that comes with familiarity.

The nail in the coffin really is compatability. VCD and SVCD you can play on your PC, your standalone, whatever comes down the pike. DivX can only be played on the PC.

Basically DivX can be GREAT, if it's 4+ and if the person encoding it is highly experienced. But for me the drawbacks make it almost useless except for maybe a PC to PC transfer format...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: homerpez on 2002-01-16 16:45:53 ]</font>

[salvius]

That's simply not true as a Nandub encoded Divx 3.11 looked/looks absolutely fantastic.

Divx is a great thing. As an input source, it sucks though. There's no way of improving that.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: salvius on 2002-01-16 19:18:20 ]</font>

[homerpez]

"Absolutely fantastic" is clearly in the eye of the beholder. For every good DivX encode I've ever seen (or done myself), I've witnessed 100 bad ones.

As for Nandub-encoded... Nandub is only a tweaked-around Virtualdub program, it has no relavance to DivX, which is a codec than many encoders can use. That's not knocking Nandub...

[SatStorm]

DiVX is a great format. Amazing quality in smaller than usual files. There is nothing bad with it.
For use with PC Monitors is recomended much more than VCD and SVCD. It is also very easy to create nowdays.

[salvius]

Argh, you know what I meant!

Honestly though, just because people don't know how to use Divx (and it really IS easier than ever right now) is not a good reason to judge Divx as bad.

I agree, usually what I download on the net is pure crappola, but only the bad encoders (the people not software, but that too, actually) can be blamed.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: salvius on 2002-01-17 08:20:01 ]</font>