x264 yeah or na

Szwagier · Post by **Szwagier** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:06 am

I wasn't thinking of switching since I'm lazy, but when I made a vid full of noise , and needed high bitrate to keep the quality nice I decided to go for it. And now I think x264 is awesome. It's like eating pie and having pie at the same time. Of course some viewers, who are sticking to WMP and see codecs as work of a devil, will always whine that they cannot play it. That downside will fade in time though , since more and more people switching to x264. The only real issue is the audience with slow pcs. Still, since i don't have a webspace and have to choose one file to upload, I prefer quality over being universal.

Infinity Squared · Post by **Infinity Squared** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:51 am

Szwagier wrote:Still, since i don't have a webspace and have to choose one file to upload, I prefer quality over being universal.

Mmm, I think for the time being, I'm definitely not giving up on XviD, particularly for videos that I actually want more people to watch. My latest video was something I thought I didn't overly care if anyone watched or not, so I tried h264, but I think for AAH2 I will probably stick to XviD just because I'm hoping more people are wanting to watch that...

Scintilla · Post by **Scintilla** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:19 am

godix wrote:And on the bright side, with xvid I don't get people bitching they can't watch the video...

Lucky.

DJ_Izumi · Post by **DJ_Izumi** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:22 am

Has anyone tried dual video track releases? In an MKV you can have entirely seperate and paralelle video tracks so you could have an MKV containing both the h.264 and the XviD or DivX and select between which you want to view.

Though, I suppose there's the issue of the single file now containing two video streams, negating the space/quality savings...

...And most people probably wouldn't even notice that the file has two video tracks or know they can switch.. >.>

BauziOLD · Post by **BauziOLD** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:41 am

Niotex wrote:I've completely switched for everything from beta to final release.
x264 is far superior simple as that.

Same over here. I want to get the maximum out of the stuff I bought and that means: 720x576 with h264 and (when I have the CD) a AAC+ audio file.
That´s what I want to do...
I would host a XviD only on a extern webspace, but well... I don´t have one.

It will get (I hope so) standard for high quality files.

Has anyone tried dual video track releases? In an MKV you can have entirely seperate and paralelle video tracks so you could have an MKV containing both the h.264 and the XviD or DivX and select between which you want to view.

=/ Nice idea, but I don´t like too download big filesizes... So I won´t do that.

Willen · Post by **Willen** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:07 am

I personally prefer downloading H.264 versions, but since I understand that many people still prefer XviD, I'm sticking with that for my video distros for now.

Now, to be the devil's advocate, I'll bring up VC1 (aka. WMV9/WMV3). It is supposed to have similar quality compared to H.264 and wide support via Microsoft (since it is their baby). It is also less demanding on hardware compared to H.264 so owners of older computers will have less problems on playback.

That being said, the last time there was a major codec comparison, x264 (H.264) beat out VC1. But major motion picture studios are using VC1 on commercial HD-DVD and Blu-ray releases and I haven't read of many complaints in the visual quality department. Oh, there is the issue of VC1 encodes losing film grain and some problems with black fades, but they are not common.

DJ_Izumi · Post by **DJ_Izumi** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:09 am

Are you saying that HD-DVD and Blu-Ray use ONLY VC-1 or it's one of the options and many companies have gone with?

Niotex · Post by **Niotex** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:17 am

aesling wrote:I prefer h264 because the quality is way better, but when I released my video in it I got such helpful QC's as "h264 sux!!!" so next time I'll probably release both Xvid and h264 versions. Of course, I can sympathize with not having a computer with good enough specs to play h264 well

I feel your pain... Noobs...

Minion · Post by **Minion** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:43 am

i havn't taken the time out to read up on the codec, but i hear people say h.264 and x.264
are they the same codec and people just can't agree what to call it, or is one of them a modified version of the other (like xvid,divx)

HoshiNoKaze · Post by **HoshiNoKaze** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:45 am

H264 Yes or No?

1.) Yes
2.) No
3.) Always

(But I'll usually do stuff in both codecs.)