[MEncoder-users] Re: Re: Re: new doom9 codec comparission (submission)

Rich Felker dalias at aerifal.cx
Mon Dec 19 02:33:00 CET 2005

On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 12:09:22AM +0100, Doom9 Feedback Hotline wrote:
> >Of course if you're using different postprocessing the output will be
> >different.... What Michael is asking for is a comparison of the
> >decoders, not the postprocessing.
> You have an answer to everything, don't you? But unless you grew up in a 
> country where they speak German, my German is better than yours and he 
> asked to use the same decoder and same postprocessing settings. Which is 
> exactly what I did by selecting one decoder to decode them all.

Indeed I agree, you must use the same postprocessing for each mpeg4
codec for the tests. (Personally I would use none at all, but that's
not really relevant.)

However, Michael was asking if there are any bugs in lavc's decoding
of xvid files, not if ffmpeg's postproc code is the same as xvid's.

> What you see is how the video is reviewed, but having the samples gives you 
> the opportunity to turn off deblocking and compare the results. I did that, 
> and guess what.. once again XviD comes out on top. You can skew the results 
> by forcing XviD to be decoded by libavcodec to make the difference less 
> apparent, but it cannot hide it's still there.

This discussion is not about the test results.

> >The lavc file included in that zip isn't even valid! I just get a
> >bunch of the following trying to play it:
> It plays fine in VLC and via DirectShow and I can't create another one 
> because the mencoder generated AVIs from the raw video stream cannot even 
> be opened via VfW and thus edited.

I smell something buggy... Have you been using ffdshow to encode all


More information about the MEncoder-users mailing list