DivX's enhancements

[Archer]

Hello!
Do GMC, Qpel, psychovisual enhancement work fine?

[UncasMS]

i personally dont like them at all

[Enchanter]

Same goes with me.

[Archer]

?

Why d'you think so guys?
There must be a reason.

[setarip]

To Archer

Experiment with each of the features and arrive at your own conclusions...

[Batman]

Depending on the bitrates/resolutions you choose QPEL, GMC, or psychovisual enchancements may or may not be helpful. You can read more about these features at the doom9 forums. I have only heard of limited success in some cases using QPEL and/or GMC. These features have not been fully developed.

[Archer]

Originally posted by Batman
I have only heard of limited success in some cases using QPEL and/or GMC. These features have not been fully developed.

I guess the same is about lumi-masking & chroma motion of Xvid

[Enchanter]

For example, QPel, while has a sharpening effect, creates disturbing effects on smokes and lights.

[Archer]

So

So it seems that divx5 is not better then 3.11 alpha ? (because all it's advanced features are in the level of development)

[Enchanter]

Re: So

Originally posted by Archer
So it seems that divx5 is not better then 3.11 alpha ? (because all it's advanced features are in the level of development)

It depends on the type of video being compressed.

I personally find DivX 3.11a better than DivX 5 when it comes to animations. DivX 3.11a retains details very well as contrasted with the smoothing effect implemented into DivX 5.

For normal videos, the camp will be divided between those who prefer the good, ol' 3.11a and those for the newer DivX codec. This time I personally find DivX 5 to be better simply because it produces less artifacts (thanks to the smoothed and thus more compressible video) and is not prone to $hit artifacts (a problem with DivX 3.11a). Level of details is not as good as DivX 3.11a though, but overall the video should look better.

B-frames should be enabled all the time when encoding, unless you are using very high bitrates (i.e. around 2000kbps and above). Its usage allows you, for a given file size, to achieve higher quality than if used without.

p.s. Whenever referring to DivX 3.11a quality, I assumed this is done with nandub (which allows 2-pass routine with the codec).

[UncasMS]

So it seems that divx5 is not better then 3.11 alpha ?

on the contrary

some of the latest options are useless to me, but overall visual impression is much better with divx5 imho!

[Archer]

Thanks guys for your interesting mind

[alucard83]

Quick question about Nandub, does it automatically do a 2 pass with Divx3.11a?

[UncasMS]

it does

i wouldnt use it anylonger, though

use divx5 or xvid instead for better results

[alucard83]

I mostly encode anime, and I notice that XviD blurs or darkens some of them while it pretty much does a great job on others. The ones that it doesn't do a good job on, I use DivX 5, but its been a while since I used Divx3.11, so I need to give it a run. I used Gnot for it a while back, but I'm running Ndub to see how it comes out