Hello !!!

I just want to know which Video Codec do you prefer?

My favorite is the WM9 Codec. The quality of the image is much better than with DivX

(my opinion)

Now i want to know yours

Thanks for voting

mpeg2

Vain

DivX codec the best!!!

Rmvb i know what u gonna say ..i don;t care...

Quote from IamKoyote :

My favorite is the WM9 Codec. The quality of the image is much better than with DivX

(my opinion)

DivX... WM9 produces a huge file for the quality you get... Which isn't too good for publishing it on the web...

Xvid .

SD.

H.264

Quote from Lautsprecher[NOR] :

H.264

HAR HAR, get a cell proc/cluster to manage demanded requests of short time...

Divx= easy to use
Xvid= very free= very good but a little confusing...

mpeg2 ??? outdated/obsolete/near to the dinosaurs imo...

You do realize that mpeg2 is currently on DVDs, VCDs, and is being broadcasted using DVB-T all over germany, and propably will be for the next 30 years?
So much for outdated.

Vain

Quote from Vain :

You do realize that mpeg2 is currently on DVDs, VCDs, and is being broadcasted using DVB-T all over germany, and propably will be for the next 30 years?
So much for outdated.

Vain

outdated and easy to DECODE, pal, try to decode 50/60 fps HI-def h-264 material on the fx-60 or the newest single core intel...

then go crying...

Another great feature of mpeg2, it's easy to decode!

Vain

but it uses way to much bitrate due to outdated encoding tech.
imagine a bouquet of 4 diff channels sharing 18Mbp/s, when 2 of them show footballgames, racings and the other two a fast movie (many scene changes, rushed cam movements/zooming).

besides dvb-t/s/c looks AWFUL in direkt compare to dvd encoding wich is actually slightly different, thats why you can't easily dismantle the recorded-TS.
The bitrate is nearly the same but looks bad.
i've seen digital broadcast from other countrys and some are doing a way better job...

i sometime listen to music while driving, i have the music in WMA Lossless 1000kbs format, but to stop my FPS from dying i re-encoded it to 128 kbs WMA and play it on XMPlay, would i be better using a different Codec? (i was thinking OGG, and mp3 is out of the question due to conversion issues) should i use a different bitrate or player? ( i only use XMPlay because of its low memory usage

try monkey's Audio

in comparsion with others (flac, wavpak, shorten, etc...) best compression achieved at "high" theres an "insane" level wich makes your files even a bit smaller but decoding takes twice as long then.
monkey's audio is a math-correct-reversible-enocoder.

Means what u put in, comes out 100% exactly the same. (try md5 hashes)
before, and after encoding/decoding cycle.
has error detection (wav hasn't).

Only reasonable if a certain music addiction was detected

otherwise use vbr mp3 encoding from 160 to 192 kbp/s

Divx codec. Dr. Divx the program is very easy to use, gave me the best results. My trial ran out though () so im using the divx codec with virtual dub to compress.

Divx: good for set top box compatability
XviD: free
WMV9: yuck
MPEG-2: very large files
h264: needs too much processing power to be practical on PC's

My vote goes to XviD.

EDIT: Vendetta: nice avatar. I wonder where you got it from.

me uses 2mbit/s for dvd archival since i'm too lazy to switch discs for watching a movie.
1,2Mbit/s for quarter-sized (384*288 -black bars) analog tv recordings (due to very little picture snow)
combined with v-dubs internal "temporal smooth" filter @ level2

xvid ... divx isnt free anymore and wmv equals pixelated

Quote from J.B. :

h264: needs too much processing power to be practical on PC's

You using a PII or what? Perhaps you've been smoking something? H.264 runs smoooooth om my Athlon XP 2500+@3300+

Quote from Lautsprecher[NOR] :

You using a PII or what? Perhaps you've been smoking something? H.264 runs smoooooth om my Athlon XP 2500+@3500+

Not at HD resolutions. Also encoding time will be a lot slower than Divx/XviD.

Quote from Lautsprecher[NOR] :

You using a PII or what? Perhaps you've been smoking something? H.264 runs smoooooth om my Athlon XP 2500+@3500+

hmmm, why would you overclock a 2500+ athlon (which runs at about 1.9 ghz if i remember right, to 3.5 ghz? would it just, well, die?

Obviously, it hasn't died or he wouldn't have made that post. 3500+ doesn't necessarily equal 3.5GHz either, just as 2500+ doesn't equal 2.5GHz.

Quote from Jakg :

hmmm, why would you overclock a 2500+ athlon (which runs at about 1.9 ghz if i remember right, to 3.5 ghz? would it just, well, die?

not 3.5 Ghz(6300+), that would require some hefty Liquid nitrogen I'm running @ 2240Mhz(3300+)

I've made a further test with Virtual DUB & DivX.

It works very well and the encoding time is very fast.
Much faster as with Dr.DivX

I didn't know that DivX is working with Virtual DUB because DivX isnt
freeware. If i try to encode a DivX movie with any other Software it always crashes.

But now it works

Thank you for the hints & voting

Quote from Lautsprecher[NOR] :

not 3.5 Ghz(6300+), that would require some hefty Liquid nitrogen I'm running @ 2240Mhz(3300+)

Damn, those extra 50MHz make LFS run that much smoother