Why Divx is still popular these days?

[Radar]

so you aren't a luddite cos you've realised how much handier it is to just burn 4 avi's to disc instead of fucking about converting them to DVD format.

Not really, it was just a weak joke (hence the in the post) I used to work with Sunray a few years ago.

 

[lobster]

no doubt about it h.264 is a superior codec and all the decent fansubbers use it but i can understand why xvid/divx is still about

also in all the realeases i have seen the size diffrence isn't that much

The file size depends on what option you choose to encode with, its a kind of art to know what's good for the material your ripping.

What to me sounds strange is that blu-ray and hd-dvd can be encoded with MPEG-2, VC-1, and H.264. MPEG-2 is DVD

I wonder how that will work, i can imagine MPEG-2 taking up those disc , but the other two must be using very low compression in order to fill up the discs.

I thought maybe material will be encoded in all 3 formats for compatibility sake. A blu-ray/hd-dvd drive can fit into a computer that's a few years old and should play the MPEG-2 reasonably smooth, the other two there is no chance.

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

i have no idea... all the stuff i got is h.264 andd seeing japan uses h264 for it's hd broadcasts i'd have guessed the blueray disks were also h.264

perhaps instead of recoding old films they will just use the mpeg-2 data

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Nah, they'll be using h.264 just at a higher quality setting. They're all lossy formats.

 

[Structaural]

The file size depends on what option you choose to encode with, its a kind of art to know what's good for the material your ripping.

What to me sounds strange is that blu-ray and hd-dvd can be encoded with MPEG-2, VC-1, and H.264. MPEG-2 is DVD

I wonder how that will work, i can imagine MPEG-2 taking up those disc , but the other two must be using very low compression in order to fill up the discs.

I thought maybe material will be encoded in all 3 formats for compatibility sake. A blu-ray/hd-dvd drive can fit into a computer that's a few years old and should play the MPEG-2 reasonably smooth, the other two there is no chance.

The MPEG2 is just for backwards compatibility with DVDs. H.264 will probably become the norm as this is the highest quality AFAIK. The compression to quality ratio is superb. MPEG2 is pretty poor in comparison. A blue-ray drive will be able to read any blue-ray codec and DVDs too. DVDs only had a resolution of around 720x576 - blue-ray is potentially 1920x1080 so this increases filesize by quite a bit.

 

[lobster]

The MPEG2 is just for backwards compatibility with DVDs. H.264 will probably become the norm as this is the highest quality AFAIK. The compression to quality ratio is superb. MPEG2 is pretty poor in comparison. A blue-ray drive will be able to read any blue-ray codec and DVDs too. DVDs only had a resolution of around 720x576 - blue-ray is potentially 1920x1080 so this increases filesize by quite a bit.

What i meant was why use MEPG2 on blu-ray/hd-dvd? when those others are better?
A less i misunderstand backwards compatibility? in that you can play blu-ray/hd-dvd MPEG-2 encoded disc on a standard DVD player?
Although blu-ray discs use a blue laser, so i am not sure how they could be read on a standard dvd player?

 

[lobster]

Nah, they'll be using h.264 just at a higher quality setting. They're all lossy formats.

you can encode h.64 as lossless

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=96059

CAVLC/CABAC:
AVC/H.264 defines two, more advanced tools for entropy coding of the bitstream syntax (macroblock-type, motionvectors + reference-index...) than MPEG-4 ASP: Context-Adaptive Variable Length Coding (CAVLC) and Context-Adaptive Binary Arithmetic Coding (CABAC)
CABAC, compared to CAVLC (aka UVLC) which is the default method in AVC/H.264, is a more powerful compression method, being said to bring down the bitrate additonally by about 10-15% (especially on high bitrates). CABAC (as CAVLC) is a lossless method and therefore will never hurt the quality, but will slow down encoding and decoding.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Lossless would eat disc space faster than a fat kid with a box of low fat doughnuts. Doubt it'll be used much, corrections welcomed.

 

[Structaural]

What i meant was why use MEPG2 on blu-ray/hd-dvd? when those others are better?
A less i misunderstand backwards compatibility? in that you can play blu-ray/hd-dvd MPEG-2 encoded disc on a standard DVD player?
Although blu-ray discs use a blue laser, so i am not sure how they could be read on a standard dvd player?

I doubt if anyone will use MPEG2 unless it's quite short - though a lot of hardware recoders out there will be MPEG2 so it may take a while for some companies to switch. If you crank the quality up it's as good as H.264 just twice the size.
Nah it just means that all your old DVDs can be used in the Blue-Ray player and will be upscaled most probably (depending on your blue-ray player). You can't read blu-ray on a normal DVD (which uses red-ray

 

[Structaural]

Lossless would eat disc space faster than a fat kid with a box of low fat doughnuts. Doubt it'll be used much, corrections welcomed.

Lossless in film is ridiculous sizewise, 24-30fps; each frame about a meg (and that's not even HD - then you're talking 5mb a frame). Though you could do in dual layer blu-ray if the film was no longer than maybe an hour. They hold around 50gb.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Yup, but you can do all sorts of clever tricks to cut down on redundant information. I forget the technical term but you can have full screen shots every second and then only store the pixels that have altered each frame between, when you've got mostly unchanging backgrounds it saves a hell of a lot of space and you preserve all the detail.

 

[lobster]

delta encoding?

 

[lobster]

If you crank the quality up it's as good as H.264 just twice the size.

It will more likely be 10 times the size, but essentially I know what you mean.

 

[Xanadu]

delta encoding?

It'd be some kind of delta encoding with keyframes. Not sure if there's a more technical term.

 

[Structaural]

It will more likely be 10 times the size, but essentially I know what you mean.

v. true

 

[Structaural]

Yup, but you can do all sorts of clever tricks to cut down on redundant information. I forget the technical term but you can have full screen shots every second and then only store the pixels that have altered each frame between, when you've got mostly unchanging backgrounds it saves a hell of a lot of space and you preserve all the detail.

That's all the lossy ones do to varying degrees as well.
I guess if you crank the quality right up then you get a similar format to Flacc, which is lossless but compressed

 

[Xanadu]

The lossy ones do much more than that!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-2#Video_coding_.28simplified.29

 

[kained&able]

I love div x. If epole know whta they are doing it should be about 700mb per film which is perfect for me as my isp has a usage limit.

If a film is worthy of a true dvd rip its probbaley worth buying the fucker rather then wasting 4gb or whatever of space.

dave

 

[DarthSydodyas]

If you fancy the better quality-encoded flick, you could always opt for the 1.4GB (2x 700mb) version rather than the DVD-rip.

 

[Xanadu]

If you fancy the better quality-encoded flick, you could always opt for the 1.4GB (2x 700mb) version rather than the DVD-rip.

My 1.4GB encoded versions of films are as good IMO as most downloaded DVD rips I've seen (the 4GB ones).

 

[longdog]

700mb movie files seem fine to me in most cases.

Quick to download and they fit on a CD. What's not to like?

 

[lobster]

700mb movie files seem fine to me in most cases.

Quick to download and they fit on a CD. What's not to like?

blocky , low quality mp3 sound , washed out colours , plenty to dislike.

 

[Cloud]

They look fine to me.

You should see the quality of my TV picture

 

[Silva]

If I'm interested in quality, I buy the stuff. Otherwise, the less hard-drive cluttering the better.

 

[rhod]

blocky , low quality mp3 sound , washed out colours , plenty to dislike.

(You could say that about most of the channels on Sky digital)! -but it's not that bad if it's a decent DVD rip and you're watching on a modestly proportioned TV- certainly better than, say watching a film on a VHS tape.

 

[keybored]

Any recommendations for a cheap DivX compatible DVD player? Quick, it's gonna be a pressie

 

[lobster]

I just like to bump this thread with an announcement.

Karagarga are now accepting HD rips only 720p for the time being, but its a great start. The Seventh Seal in HD is already there

 

[Jambooboo]

Any recommendations for a cheap DivX compatible DVD player? Quick, it's gonna be a pressie

Asda, £25 for a HDMI upscaling (1080p!) DVD player - it's one of their Dual own brand ones. It doesn't say DivX compatible on the box, but I tried out a couple of DVDs worth of movies on it (so about eight or so) and they all worked fine. It wouldn't surprise me if it's multiregion - I can't check as all my bought DVDs are Pal while all my NTSC DVDs are downloads and hence have had their region-coding stripped.

It comes with a scart lead rather than a HDMI cable, but they can be had for a fiver.

 

[keybored]

Asda, £25 for a HDMI upscaling (1080p!) DVD player - it's one of their Dual own brand ones. It doesn't say DivX compatible on the box, but I tried out a couple of DVDs worth of movies on it (so about eight or so) and they all worked fine. It wouldn't surprise me if it's multiregion - I can't check as all my bought DVDs are Pal while all my NTSC DVDs are downloads and hence have had their region-coding stripped.

It comes with a scart lead rather than a HDMI cable, but they can be had for a fiver.

Thanks for the reply, but too late; it was for a xmas present. I got her a Tosh SD270E for £25 in the end and she doesn't have HD so she's happy with it.
I'm thinking of getting myself the SD370E for the upscaling though. Any thoughts on it?

 

[Jambooboo]

Thanks for the reply, but too late; it was for a xmas present. I got her a Tosh SD270E for £25 in the end and she doesn't have HD so she's happy with it.
I'm thinking of getting myself the SD370E for the upscaling though. Any thoughts on it?

Ooops, I just saw the '23' on the date and mistakenly thought it was today.

Toshiba's have a good name for (upscaling) DVD players, as do Pioneer. I think a lot of techophiles opt for an Oppo (I hadn't heard of the brand before but it's very highly regarded - check out AV Forums).