[MPlayer-users] Re: lavc vs. xvid (and improving lavc quality)

[Jakub Misak]

D Richard Felker III <dalias <at> aerifal.cx> writes:

> They didn't even use libavcodec but rather ffvfw. I think there's a
> new vfw interface in ffdshow now, but the old "ffvfw" used an ancient
> version of lavc and used xvid's rate control code (which is much
> worse) rather than the native lavc code.

You didn't read the test at all. You're always saying that doom9 is incompetent 
because he used bad libavcodec settings, and XviD 2-pass.

The fact is that the libavcodec he used was not too old, and he used the 
settings that FFmpeg developers themselves told him to use:

mbd=2:4mv:trell:cmp=2:subcmp=2:vmax_b_frames=1

Secondly, he didn't use the XviD 2-pass mode, he used the FFmpeg ratecontrol, it 
is optional in ffvfw. Exactly because he wanted to test FFmpeg, not XviD.

As for libxvcodec vs. XviD, I also think XviD 1.0 is currently superior, as its 
picture lacks the raw primitive FFmpeg-like blocking while still being clean and 
sharp. You may not successfully repair mudding with postprocessing, but with 
XviD, posprocessing is often not needed anyway, and its mudding is not as strong 
as it used to be. Plus, the MPlayer postprocessing tends to blur the picture, 
which is something that not everyone appreciates.