Divx? Won't play???

Printable View

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

04-09-2011, 04:27 PM
dlanor

Quote:

Originally Posted by TnA

Dude, sorry... But this/that is total BS.
I don't want to insult you, but I just can't stand it if missinformation is spreaded...

But hey,... If someone can proof me wrong here, I gladly accept it... ^^

I think you guys are talking about two different things, both called 'divx'.

One is the divx codec standard for video compression, and of course that does not contain a lot of 'weird stuff'. So you are right about that TnA.

But I think Northbear is also correct, as I don't believe he is talking about the divx codec standard at all, but rather about the new-fangled and doodad-crazy video container format which is also called divx.

This was developed by the commercial DivX group shortly after they finally accepted that they couldn't have a video monopoly using the DivX codec, thanks to the fully compatible freeware XviD codecs that homebrewers developed. So they decided to try for a monopoly on a new DivX container instead (abysmally stupid IMO), and as pseudo-motivation for this new container they added various features that standard AVI files don't have (multiple sound tracks and subtitles, and even interactive menus etc). And compared to a standard AVI file that is 'weird stuff' indeed.

Best regards: dlanor
04-09-2011, 05:56 PM
TnA

Quote:

Originally Posted by dlanor

I think you guys are talking about two different things, both called 'divx'.

One is the divx codec standard for video compression, and of course that does not contain a lot of 'weird stuff'. So you are right about that TnA.

Yepp, I was talking about the codec.
The container-format which uses the .divx-extension and has support for all this 'weird stuff' is called 'DivX Ultra' and yes, I even knew it from the Beta-Stage and allready tried it out back then, with a Stargate-Season (my intention was to create a 'DivX-Ultra'-File with Menus, alot audio-streams [all available stuff, atleast all official syncros] and a lot different sub-titles for all parts of one season and it should match on a DVD-DL).

Quote:

But I think Northbear is also correct, as I don't believe he is talking about the divx codec standard at all, but rather about the new-fangled and doodad-crazy video container format which is also called divx.

Yes,... and since it never was supported by a big range of devices, it never was a very common container-format.
Another thing is,... AVIs can also contain multiple audio-streams (but I think it wasn't defined for the standard. Not sure about that.).

Quote:

This was developed by the commercial DivX group shortly after they finally accepted that they couldn't have a video monopoly using the DivX codec, thanks to the fully compatible freeware XviD codecs that homebrewers developed. So they decided to try for a monopoly on a new DivX container instead (abysmally stupid IMO), and as pseudo-motivation for this new container they added various features that standard AVI files don't have (multiple sound tracks and subtitles, and even interactive menus etc). And compared to a standard AVI file that is 'weird stuff' indeed.

Best regards: dlanor

If I remember correctly, it is even possible to embed subtitles (.srt?) into AVIs as well, but only one or two at max. (and no, I do not mean the hardcoded stuff, where the movie-pictures are rendered/encoded with those).
04-09-2011, 09:44 PM
Yuki

Quote:

Originally Posted by dlanor

This was developed by the commercial DivX group shortly after they finally accepted that they couldn't have a video monopoly using the DivX codec, thanks to the fully compatible freeware XviD codecs that homebrewers developed. So they decided to try for a monopoly on a new DivX container instead (abysmally stupid IMO), and as pseudo-motivation for this new container they added various features that standard AVI files don't have (multiple sound tracks and subtitles, and even interactive menus etc). And compared to a standard AVI file that is 'weird stuff' indeed.

And now, a few years down the line they've performed the mother of all u-turns by turning DivX into a h.264 encoder and embracing the open .mkv format as the container of choice for their "DivX Plus HD" content.
04-09-2011, 10:38 PM
Northbear

Quote:

Originally Posted by dlanor

This was developed by the commercial DivX group shortly after they finally accepted that they couldn't have a video monopoly using the DivX codec, thanks to the fully compatible freeware XviD codecs that homebrewers developed. So they decided to try for a monopoly on a new DivX container instead (abysmally stupid IMO), and as pseudo-motivation for this new container they added various features that standard AVI files don't have (multiple sound tracks and subtitles, and even interactive menus etc). And compared to a standard AVI file that is 'weird stuff' indeed.

That was part of what i was talking about. But to give a more detailed definition of "junk data" look at the packed bitstream that divx encoded files contain. If you unpack this and save this it is possible to shrink the file size (depending on the version (pro/free and version number)). If you wish you may add an re-encode with a high-quality 1-pass encoding of xvid and get the exact same quality like the source Divx file. So divx is not the fileformat/encoder of my choice since there are also differences in the encoding quality comparing the free version and the pro version and DivX is only available on a few platforms (OS) while Xvid can be used an every platform you can compile the source code on.
04-17-2011, 07:35 AM
TnA

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northbear

That was part of what i was talking about. But to give a more detailed definition of "junk data" look at the packed bitstream that divx encoded files contain.

I encode my DivX-Files on my own since years and not one of my AVI/DivX-Files uses 'packed bitstream' at all...
Still they use a '720*576@25fps & anamorph-coded'-profile, 4-pass-rendered and the DivX-Codec is manually tuned through it's 'cmd-like' config-line.
So,... Really full DVD-Resolution&Quality @~720MB... I never found an avi/divx on the net which really used the full size/rez and also had the same quality...
I'm a quality-junkie when it comes to this and I must say... Sorry, but I do not get as good results with Xvid, as I get with DivX (even thought I'm Pro-OpenSource and of course Xvid could be used on more systems, then only Windows-PCs.).

Quote:

If you unpack this and save this it is possible to shrink the file size (depending on the version (pro/free and version number)).

If that is true, the video-stream wasn't compressed correctly in the first place... If it were, it wouldn't be possible to save more than maybe 5% more space...
If it's correctly encoded, I wonder if a 'packed bitstream'-avi would be even 2% smaller, than the 'normal' one...

Not to mention that A LOT devices are mutually incompatible to AVIs/DivX, which are compressed with a packed bitstream...

Btw.: What do you mean with 'depending on the version'?
I only use the PRO-Version and never had the 'issue' about not properly compressed AVIs,...

Quote:

If you wish you may add an re-encode with a high-quality 1-pass encoding of xvid and get the exact same quality like the source Divx file.

First of,... I do not use 1-pass-encoding, but atleast 2- or 3-pass...
What is 1pass good for anyway (except for slow machines, or 'direct recording' for example from a TV-Capture-Device...)?

Quote:

So divx is not the fileformat/encoder of my choice since there are also differences in the encoding quality comparing the free version and the pro version and DivX is only available on a few platforms (OS) while Xvid can be used an every platform you can compile the source code on.

True, there are differences between the PRO and the free version...
But still,... DivX PRO produces a better quality than Xvid in my meaning...

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page