What is the best encoding program and is there a better codec than divx?

[binkybuckle]

Hi everyone, I was just wondering what is the best encoding program, taking into account: 1.ease of use 2.quality of encoding 3.speed of encoding 4.defantly no encoding directly from DVD-ROM(in other words, no encoding where the DVD-ROM is in constant use throughout the encoding processes). I currently use flask1.1preview with thundermism plugin with divx5.02, works very well. when i decript the vob file to my HHD I use CladDVDXP with no IFO parsing. Also I wish to Know if there is a better and more reliable codec other than divx. I am starting to get real serious in the convertion of my DVD's so any extra speed/quailty would be a great help.

[setarip]

"Also I wish to Know if there is a better and more reliable codec other than divx."

Although it gets very little "air time" at these forums, you might want to look into the most recently released version of the cross-platform (PC and Mac) 3IVX codec. It does an excellent job (the best I've seen) of one-pass encoding. Settings of 75% to 100% yield clean, crisp images ;>}

[Enchanter]

Have a look at the XviD codec. Of my few conversions using the codec and playing them with Nic's (some bugs) or FFDShow decoder, they yield superb quality that does not seem possible with DivX.

The only drawback is that the codec is still under development (very very frequent updates) and the latest builds may actually give you problems compared to older ones (because aggressive approaches to testing new settings are necessary in this kind of development). However, if you're serious about learning, XviD will not disappoint as long as you are patient and willing to overcome problems with the codec (hey, it's not finalised yet).

[Bourrine]

Yes it is...

There is a codec better and I think it's the best...
But it's not an open source codec so I think it's forbidden to
speak about it on this forum.

But as everybody knows (after to use it) it's a very very powerfull
codec and give for me the best results.

More it's very easy to use, so novices can do great works without
experience.

But it's not open source....

I say that because people seem to ignore it ...

[gs0666]

And which codec is that???

[Bourrine]

I think I can't tell you on this forum

I'm a junior member and I'm afraid to be baned.
Send me a mail if you want to know, but I really think you see the codec I mean.

[gs0666]

I don't think you will be banned as long you don't add any "warez" links

[Bourrine]

RV9 and the results are very good for experts and novices

[hacker_on_fire]

Either you tell us or you stop talking about it cos their's no point.

By the way you won't be banned, if abide by the rules of the forum.

[Enchanter]

Originally posted by Bourrine
RV9 and the results are very good for experts and novices

I have read positive remarks about this in Doom9's forum. However, there is an article at Doom9 that claims that the codec still suffers from a noticable loss of details. Is that correct?

[LaFouine]

@setarip

Hello,

You said 3IVX made the best work you ever seen in a single pass process.

Is the DivX 2 pass process better than the 3IVX single, up to you ?

Thank you

[Bourrine]

answer for loss details

In my opinion the codec realise a very good work.
It managed to keep with a very low bitrate the most important parts of the pictures.
The loss of details is a little bit sensitive but compare to DivX and Xvid there aren't any agressive pixels.
You have to try it to judge by yourself.
But most of people who often see it or for the first time are agree to say the aspect is better than Xvid or DivX.

Note that you can reach the same quality with Xvid but you have to make so much tests and filters.

The encoding resolution reachs by RV9 for the same bitarte is always greater than the DivX-XviD one.

Everyone is free to think what he wants.....

[Enchanter]

Re: Bourrine

Thanks for the reply.

I'm not planning to go trying out the RV9 codec yet. So far, I'm still impressed with the quality I'm getting from XviD (it remains better than DivX 5, to me) and am still spending time tweaking and updating the codec. I might take a look into the RV9 codec anytime though given the general positive reviews from almost everyone who has used it.

[Batman]

Here's my thoughts:

If you have knowledge of SBC don't throw it overboard...it still yields good results
divx 5.02 pro is very advanced codec, with some good features, also easy to use and relatively stable
xvid, under heavy development, a good codec you should test
RV9 is becoming more popular but I do not think it currently matches the quality of divx 5.0s pro/xvid

[hacker_on_fire]

i have seen some good rips on the net, of movies encoded using Xvid. so i will soon be testing it as i have heard good things about it.
however i would like to know if anybody knows when their will be a 'stable' version released of the codec.