[MPlayer-users] Re: [POOL] Moderate some users (was: Re: [-] Re: divx 6)

[Rich Felker]

On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 10:22:31AM +0200, Matthias Wieser wrote:
> > When talking about GMC, you just say "It can improve quality" without
> > getting into any specifics to make your point.
> 
> Of course it can help. Not only scientific animated visualisations but also 
> "real world" content. E.g. I have encoded a video captured from a 
> helicopter with and without gmc.
> gmc gives 35.50dB vs 35.44 dB without gmc. This clearly proves that gmc can 
> help (1).

No, PSNR proves nothing, especially so close. Differences in the type
of motion comp (which gmc is) will make differences on this scale
without reflecting anything about quality. You'll need to use a better
metric or doubleblind viewing test to get any useful information.

Again this reflects your complete incompetence on the technologies
involved and your insistence on convincing the public that your
prejudices are correct. This is why I flame you.

> Of course not, because I don't want newbies reading this mailing list (or 
> the archives) believe that xvid and divx are slow and bad and that the 
> reason for the not-so-good lavc results in the doom9 contest have been 
> caused by unfair rules.

I never said that xvid was slow or bad, just that the doom9 test was
completely invalid. Divx _is_ shit and everyone knows this. I don't
think it's ever been seriously disputed.

Rich