Author Topic: Codec Comparison (Read 9397 times)

Daffy · « **Reply #30 on:** January 03, 2006, 10:38:42 PM »

Xvid

Labrat · « **Reply #31 on:** February 18, 2006, 12:59:50 AM »

In case anyone cares.....
Here are some of my results compressing the same file:

From a file edited in Vegas (with audio) at res. 512 x 384 : size 6,011,922 KB
(I know..sick)

with Daffy's recomendations,

3ivx : size after rendering with VD = 132,742 KB
divx : size (after vd) = 116,236 KB

I found the divx quality a little higher.

with Kenny's specs,
http://www.gtastunting.com/forums/index.ph...opic=10560&st=0

3ivx : size (after vd) = 71,413 KB
divx : size (after vd) = 68,390 KB

again the divx was a little better.
I have yet to try the xvid codec.

Daffy's specs definitely produce a better product..... :bowdown: ..but a huge file.
Still, Kenny's specs produce a file that is half the size (for my project anyway) but more "pixley".

Now, my question is.....when should one put the audio track in? Before or after video compression? Does it matter?

mrkaki · « **Reply #32 on:** July 16, 2006, 10:43:27 AM »

I tried Xdiv - The status window crashed and I couldn't record
I tried Dvix payed - couldn't create AVI frame
I tried 3vix - The recorder just crashes

I'm using your settings on Camastasia Recorder 3, What's wrong!?

Daffy · « **Reply #33 on:** July 16, 2006, 10:53:51 AM »

mrkaki:
Disable the status window in Xvid, you don't need it.
Try using another recording software, like Fraps.

Labrat:
That's up to you, i recommend rendering the audio for itself as a wav file and then importing it to Virtual Dub to render it there.

BujutzuStyle · « **Reply #34 on:** October 20, 2006, 03:14:49 AM »

I use the x246 Codec ! without virtual dub , i have tried all (xivd,mpeg4,divx)
but that has the best quali result and the smallest file !

BujutzuStyle · « **Reply #35 on:** October 26, 2006, 10:19:38 PM »

delete

FIGHTER · « **Reply #36 on:** May 03, 2007, 11:59:29 AM »

I Will Try it!!! Thanks Daffy

plumpegg · « **Reply #37 on:** May 03, 2007, 03:54:13 PM »

daffy your just Genious

Daffy · « **Reply #38 on:** May 03, 2007, 09:06:25 PM »

Thanks i guess

Psycho · « **Reply #39 on:** July 05, 2007, 10:16:59 PM »

I just watch MQ vids and they seem to be fine...

the only thing I can think of thast would make me want to have the highest quality is if i wanted to burn vids to a dvd or something...

what's the big point of having super-high quality vids, that makes the quality slightly better? The stunts and editing are still the same...
-Anders

Daffy · « **Reply #40 on:** July 05, 2007, 10:38:07 PM »

Cause it looks better.

brandon6199 · « **Reply #41 on:** July 05, 2007, 11:56:26 PM »

I still think the best quality render besides the .mp4, (which I can't get to work for some reason ), is the WMV 720p Extreme Quality one that daffy posted some time ago. It is lovely

VaNilla · « **Reply #42 on:** July 06, 2007, 01:45:37 AM »

AVI ist better than that .

Souzuk · « **Reply #43 on:** September 10, 2007, 01:46:37 PM »

thanks daffy i will use it for S ............ solo

Olin · « **Reply #44 on:** September 10, 2007, 01:58:41 PM »

Personally, I think x264 is the best looking codec when tweaked properly. Otherwise XviD is the way to go for me.