Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

In-Depth Look At Video Codecs

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the jaggies-and-artifacts dept.

johnsee writes "Atomicmpc has an incredibly in- depth look at a wide range of video codecs. It looks not only at their inner workings, but also shows the quality produced by each at a variety of settings and situations."

4 of 149 comments (clear)

  1. Re:so which one wins? by Silverlancer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Xvid is horrible at low bitrates in my experience. For example, I did a test encode of a 1680x1050 FRAPS video at 1000kbps. H.264 was actually quite watchable (!!!) and you could even read the size-12 text in the chat windows. Xvid couldn't even get below 1400kbps or so with every frame at quantizer 31 with max motion search settings and the like. So I'd say Xvid is the opposite--good at higher bitrates, worthless at low ones.

  2. We Don't Care!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    We don't care about all of these redundant codecs. Just pick a high quality format with good compression and make it an OPEN STANDARD for all playback devices. Computers, Web, mobile phone, home theater, whatever. Just make it standard so we don't have to waste time with hundreds of incompatible formats and all the stupid codecs, drivers, and devices to play them! GAH!

    1. Re:We Don't Care!! by Rui+del-Negro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know who the "we" you're talking about is, but some people do understand that different situations correspond to different needs. Sometimes you need lossless quality, sometimes you need the lowest possible data rate, sometimes you need a format that can be decoded with very little CPU power.

      Do you also think that there should be a single type of paint, a single type of tire, a single type of lightbulb, and so on...?

  3. Re:WMA 10 Pro LBR! by Movi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I know youre kind of on-topic but this is the 2nd time ive seen you in this thread waving about what cool codecs you have. Thats fine, however, what good is it when i can't hear it/see it since i use Linux and Mac OS X. I _hate_ it when some doofus encodes something i want to see into wmv9 - this means extra hassle for me - either with maplyer and binary codecs, or WMVPlayer from flip4mac. The upside of _all_ other codecs mentioned here is that theyre all open source (ok, exclude divx, its superseeded by xvid anyway). So please, stop astroturfing.