Trying to decide between mpeg2, Divx 6.1.1, xVid, and wmv

DirectDK · Post by **DirectDK** » Sun May 14, 2006 8:28 pm

Hello!

Well, I literally spent 5 solid days and nights working on this video, and I just finished it! It's the first amv I've done in over 3 years so I'm really excited. I used to do them back in the day when mpeg was the only codec to go with, but now so much has changed I have a few questions!

Anyhow, I was using Vegas to do my video, and my source files were Anbu_Aone Naruto fansubs. They were encoded into Divx 6.1.1 (2 Logical CPUs) but they were giving me horrible artifacts when I was working inside Vegas. In frustration, I just exported all the clips amongst 150 episodes (yes this amv spans a lot of eps) into mpeg2 so I could work with them. Ideally, I would have liked to export to uncompressed AVIs, but I really didn't have the HD space and I just wanted to start working on the video!

So, I was basically working with:
- mpeg2
- 23.976 fps
- square pixel, 1.0
- progressive scan, 640 x 480

Now that my video is done, I exported into 5 different formats. To be honest, my eye can't tell much difference between some of them. The only ones that look different are the mpegs from the avis.

Anyways, I plan to put this on my website, but I'm trying to figure out which would be my best choice. Can all computers nowadays watch mpeg2s, Xvids, or Divx??? I would think so, but then again, maybe it's not as universal as I think it is.

So here are the versions I exported:

1. MPEG 1
61 megs

2. MPEG 2
119 megs

3. DIVX 6.1.1 (2 Logical CPUs)
32 megs

4. XVID MPEG 4
33 megs

5. WMV 9
114 megs

All of them were exported in the same frame rate (23.976), with square pixels, 1.0, 640 x 480, and I turned all the video settings up to "highest" or "best".

Could you guys/gals give me your thoughts on which ones I should post on my website? Space is sort of an issue, but I don't mind posting a big file either. My main concern is that it's compatible with most computers (both PC and MAC) and also it treats the sync of the video/audio well.

Note: There is a lot of precise rhythmic flashes and transitions in this video so I want them to be as clear and clean as possible.

Thanks for your help! Sorry for the long post!

Kalium · Post by **Kalium** » Sun May 14, 2006 8:59 pm

Can all computers view MPEG2, XviD, and DivX? No. I doubt the PDP-11 I could dregde up could handle ANY video at all.

Any decently modern computer? Sure. There's also the playback guide. It exists for a reason.

Also, you're better off exporting to a lossless form like HuffYUV and then compressing externally. Especially with XviD, you should use the encoding guide.

Willen · Post by **Willen** » Sun May 14, 2006 9:23 pm

I say number 4 since a quality test done a while back showed that Xvid produce better results overall than Divx and it offers the best quality to filesize ratio.

amvwizard · Post by **amvwizard** » Sun May 14, 2006 10:23 pm

don't use WMV thats all i have to say....

Minion · Post by **Minion** » Sun May 14, 2006 10:47 pm

amvwizard wrote:don't use WMV thats all i have to say....

x2

DJ_Izumi · Post by **DJ_Izumi** » Sun May 14, 2006 10:54 pm

There is an advantage to WMV however. Any windows box (Well 98 and up) should be able to playback the file without people going 'I GET SOUND BUT NO VIDEO' and such since WMP (If they don't have DivX or Xvid, they're probably using WMP, admit it) will play it out of the box or update itself.

If you want every windows box to play it, WMV is actually a safe way to go.

Kalium · Post by **Kalium** » Sun May 14, 2006 11:08 pm

DJ_Izumi wrote:If you want every windows box to play it, WMV is actually a safe way to go.

But the quality will suck and we'll all be annoyed at you for it. So please, don't use WMV.

Friends don't let friends use WMV.

DJ_Izumi · Post by **DJ_Izumi** » Sun May 14, 2006 11:17 pm

That would depend on the implimentation of WMV. WMV 9 (Who's FourCC is WMV3) is compliant as part of VC-1 (Ya know, that video codec offically supported by HD-DVD and Blu-Ray?) can actually do very well and high end piracy groups have made use of it before moving up to h.264.

I wouldn't make with the blanket hate of WMV when there are several forms of WMV.

Kalium · Post by **Kalium** » Sun May 14, 2006 11:19 pm

DJ_Izumi wrote:(Ya know, that video codec offically supported by HD-DVD and Blu-Ray?)

Only because Microsoft managed to get it shoved in there. It didn't get in there on technical weight.

DJ_Izumi · Post by **DJ_Izumi** » Sun May 14, 2006 11:39 pm

There are 15 other companies in with VC-1 as well. :/