I tried to render a short 3 minute video for YouTube using the trial version of the DivX Codec (6.2.5) and, frankly, got mixed results. The rendered video images that I shot did look nice and sharp on my PC using the DivX Player. The MP3 audio even sounded sharper and clearer, too. But I also rendered some album effects and those came out terrible. The turning pages were exaggeratedly jagged. I tried various higher quality bit rates and passes, no improvement.
In the end, I submitted an 88MB file to YouTube and it looked no better than my previously submitted mpeg1. Actually it looked worse with the album effect distorted.
My next experiment was to use the DivX converter to convert a rendered mpeg2 of the video. The album effect wasn't distorted, but the resulting video was obviously compressed. It wasn't made at the highest quality bitrate because that caused the converted to crash. So I used just the default setting for the bitrate. I didn't see a way of specifying MP3 for the audio and it wasn't as good as before.
Based on my short experiments, I gave up on using DivX. In the end, it made no difference, or a lesser of a difference, on YouTube for me.
DivX Codec 6.2.5 experience
Moderator: Ken Berry
-
NoM.O
AFAIK, Youtube convert all their videos to .flv for viewing (I could be wrong here but I don't think so), .flv is a very highly compressed format which more often than not results in blocky images, no matter how good the original file.
Also 88MB seems a bit on the high side for 3 min DivX video, you should be able to get that down to at least half without a noticeable loss of quality. As an example, I have a pile of music videos captured from Digital TV that are usually about 100 - 150MB (mpeg2), I've cut these down to around 40MB each without noticeable quality loss.
MODS - If this next bit is breaking forum rules let me know and I'll edit it out.
As for creating DivX files, I always use AutoGK to convert my finished mpeg2 files, it is free (available here - http://www.autogk.me.uk/modules.php?name=Downloads), and as far as I'm concerned it speaks the truth when it says it is THE tool for DivX and XviD conversion. It allows you you to pick the audio type and bitrate, the frame size, as well as giving you the option to choose the desired file size in MB, or the quality (in percentages), and if you hit ctrl+F9 there are a whole range of other settings you can choose from. After using it, I wouldn't go anywhere near the DivX converter, even though I have the full pro version (6.2.5).
peace.
Also 88MB seems a bit on the high side for 3 min DivX video, you should be able to get that down to at least half without a noticeable loss of quality. As an example, I have a pile of music videos captured from Digital TV that are usually about 100 - 150MB (mpeg2), I've cut these down to around 40MB each without noticeable quality loss.
MODS - If this next bit is breaking forum rules let me know and I'll edit it out.
As for creating DivX files, I always use AutoGK to convert my finished mpeg2 files, it is free (available here - http://www.autogk.me.uk/modules.php?name=Downloads), and as far as I'm concerned it speaks the truth when it says it is THE tool for DivX and XviD conversion. It allows you you to pick the audio type and bitrate, the frame size, as well as giving you the option to choose the desired file size in MB, or the quality (in percentages), and if you hit ctrl+F9 there are a whole range of other settings you can choose from. After using it, I wouldn't go anywhere near the DivX converter, even though I have the full pro version (6.2.5).
peace.
Last edited by NoM.O on Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
jchunter
I think that others on this forum have reported bad experiences with the Album transition - probably not Divx' fault.
When creating a video file with Divx, you have to setup the detailed properties - especially dialing in the right balance between bitrate, quality, and the amount of time you have available. When I first made high def. video files, the default bitrate (3Mbps) was too low for good results. I could see macroblocking on dark scenes. These disappeared when I moved the bitrate to 8Mbps and others have reported good results at 6Mbps. The downside is that rendering hi def at this bitrate needs 15 - 20x real time.
I also get better results on moving images when I select "Deinterlace Input" and select Bicubic: Normal.
When creating a video file with Divx, you have to setup the detailed properties - especially dialing in the right balance between bitrate, quality, and the amount of time you have available. When I first made high def. video files, the default bitrate (3Mbps) was too low for good results. I could see macroblocking on dark scenes. These disappeared when I moved the bitrate to 8Mbps and others have reported good results at 6Mbps. The downside is that rendering hi def at this bitrate needs 15 - 20x real time.
I also get better results on moving images when I select "Deinterlace Input" and select Bicubic: Normal.