need advice concerning encoding

[Myouh]

I have made 6 AMVs until today, and for all those AMVs, I have used the same techniqual combination:

-MPEG-2 version (big size, high quality)
-XviD version using the best settings (as long as it doesn't exceed 100 mo).

I will soon release a seventh video, so I want first your opinion about my "traditional" techniqual choice, and second, a suggestion about a better combination if there's one.

[Zarxrax]

Go with x264, its way better than xvid.

[Myouh]

Zarxrax, I remember having tried that once, and it was your program I think, but it gave terrible results. I guess I'm the one to blame since it must be a wrong configuration problem, but knowing this doesn't solve the problem. is there any accurate guide on how to encode with x264, like the XviD guide?

one more thing, you agree MPEG-2 is the best for contest submissions?

[The Origonal Head Hunter]

Guide for everything you ever did and didn't want to know about making AMVs. At the very bottom is a guide for using zarxgui, though its recommended you read the whole thing. And you probably got horrible results out of zarxgui because of what you exported from your program.

[Zarxrax]

is there any accurate guide on how to encode with x264, like the XviD guide?

one more thing, you agree MPEG-2 is the best for contest submissions?

Well I made my gui such that people shouldn't need a guide for it. Just load up the file and press the button, and you should get great quality. Make sure you get the newest one from herethough. Just ignore that it says it may be buggy, as it's been pretty thoroughly tested now with no major issues.

As for contests, check with each contest to see what their preferred format is. Many of them prefer mpeg2 because their playback hardware supports it really well. I would recommend that you keep a lagarith lossless copy of your videos on hand, that way you can make different encodes in the future if you want.

[Myouh]

I tried this version of your software and yea, I got really good results this time.
I still have to compare it a little more seriously to XviD to take a final decision, but i'm already quite satisfied.

now tell me, is there anything that can be done concerning the settings of your program to have the best possible quality, if one doesn't care about the size? (what are the changes to be done to the default settings)

[Zarxrax]

Just set the quality box to "insane". That will make it take a very long time to encode your video, but at the best possible quality. (i think the last time i checked it took about 20x longer than the normal setting, for about 5% improvement)
The other main setting is the quantizer. Smaller values = bigger size and better quality.

[Myouh]

why doesn't the "estimated filesize" work?
I got 150 Mo... too much...
I want to set the quantizer so as to obtain a specific filesize. Is it possible to do so?

[Qyot27]

why doesn't the "estimated filesize" work?
I got 150 Mo... too much...
I want to set the quantizer so as to obtain a specific filesize. Is it possible to do so?

No, it isn't possible, regardless of which program you use. Quantizer more or less equates to a quality setting of sorts (not quite, as there is a distinct difference between the --qp and --crf options in x264*, but in any case), and therefore the output size will be unpredictable.

*Quantizer describes the level of compression; Constant Quantizer (--qp) will match that level the entire time, quality be damned if some scenes need a lower quant value. Constant Quality (--crf) will adjust the Quantizer to maintain the quality level similar to an average quant value, fluctuations in size be damned. At least, that's what I can understand from the descriptions.

For a specific size, you have to use ABR mode and set a bitrate. Doing that will restrict the quantizer to hit in the range of the specified bitrate, but making the quantizer the determiner can't give you a guarantee of output size (although my own encodes using --crf 18 generally net me 10 megs per minute, but my settings are probably more insane than the Insane profile in Zarx264gui and thus stringently keep the bitrate from inflating - it also takes forever to encode on my ancient setup, averaging about 0.20 frames per second on a good day).

[Scintilla]

(although my own encodes using --crf 18 generally net me 10 megs per minute, but my settings are probably more insane than the Insane profile in Zarx264gui and thus stringently keep the bitrate from inflating - it also takes forever to encode on my ancient setup, averaging about 0.20 frames per second on a good day).

I'm curious. Do you ever get complaints that people's computers can't handle the playback of suchly-encoded files?