@Power2All:

We aren't ignoring your original argument concerning mp4 being an upgrade of mp3, we're just going through on the fact you were basing your information on the assumption that MP4 had something to do with an audio format you were using, when in this case MP4 is defining the container as specified by the MPEG Consortium.

I'd also like to ask where all these problems w/ the alternative containers come from? My mirror (one of nearly 15) for the cccp has transfered 75GB worth of playback pack in the last month which would lead me to believe that approx 15k people have downloaded the pack from my mirror alone. if even 10% of these people were encountering problems that would be approx 1500 new registered users on the cccp forums asking for assistance, as links to the CCCP site are included with each pack. As this isn't the case where are these tons and tons of people w/ problems, or are you just talking about yourself.

Further more (and I'm just addressing your original post on asuki) if avi does indeed support more then one stream, as you have pointed out yourself several times by referencing alexnoe's work, then your original argument of

really becomes kind of pointless as all of the listed containers have similar features for multistream environments. As for proof, I believe it has been provided as to why the problem exists, and why you haven't encountered it (your level of relatively simple h264 doesn't warrant it).

My question is, Why wouldn't you want to make your h264 video in mp4 w/ aac audio so that people can play it now without any problems (if my mother can play it fine, so can anyone else) and possibly in the near future be playable on any hddvd/blueray machine?

Batori

PS: Continuing previously locked topic.

I have my reasons.
We come at the same point why the topic was locked.
You got your oppinion about MP4 and the whole history, and I got my oppinion about the history and the MP4/MKV thing.
Why I don't use MP4 or MKV, is not because your parents and what not can play the movie, it's because of the people that are having problems.
Why should they get CCCP or K-lite codec pack.

Done.

Guys please try to keep it clean this time. ne? I personaly dont see why another topic was openend when the question could have been asked trough pm. This will only atrackt unnessary conflict

Concerning our viewpoints, yes we have them, and yes they are different. I think we know this and it doesn't need to be repeated.

I'm still waitting to find the MASSIVE number of people having problems with this. On top of that, how is it ANY different downloading ffdshow,coreavc, nero showtime, or any other h264 decoder from downloading a combined pack? What is the difference between having a user download 1 thing to play back a file, vs 2 seperate things, or hell, 1 fully supported solution with updates?

"We" have not reached a consensus. "We" have not come to the same point in the discussion at all. "You" have repeatedly avoided providing a more solid reason for this decision, and "We" have provided answers to your statements and questions.

@ Mitzuki :: PM is irrelevent. There is no conflict (besides several overly vocal users using personal attacks instead of thought out retorts).

@ all :: Just so we're clear, I'm not approaching this discussion as a rabid encoder looking to stretch his e-peen. I download, watch, and enjoy the work being done right now and would have been along to ask similar questions anyways as kisssub is my group of choice for IV. I'm simply trying to make my video of choice better.

Batori.

You may do so.
As you say yourself, you have no problems at all with the encodes I make.
So does with all the other people.
I don't hear nobody else complaining that the anime is in a AVI format.
Is it so hard for you to understand why I don't step aside from AVI ?
Or is it just ignorance ?

Me and the staff of KissSub discussed this already, and we decided to stick with AVI.
If you cannot understand this, then I would suggest you to not download the bad AVI file we produce.

First off, yes I do not understand your choice at all. It is not governed by fact or evidence, but purely on your own whims.

but FINALLY it happened.

we got the perverbial "I don't give a shit about what you think answer, we're doing it our way come hell or high water"

and as for being called ignorant I'll point to the wiki which you don't like people point to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorance

of note here is definition 2

This one quote alone sums up your side of the discussion.

Batori

I dont think you read it right.
Here let me quote it for you:

I hope this clears your intention of making it a private matter.
Now stop accusing and do what I said, stick with downloading our episodes or don't. Your choice.

I'm sorry if you just realized now but the idea that Power2All could actually sufficiently answer the "Why" question in public or private was given up long ago. The only reasons these posts exist is to show just how foolish and ignorant he is :), thats all. It's rather fun you should try too.

I wish I could just go around saying "I have long encoding history and many technical reasons for what I do" while relating NO DETAILS whatsoever and do anything I please. Especially when every "expert" is disagreeing with me and there are ZERO to fly to my defense. Not one encoder, no one seems to find this strange. But Power2All must have already brainwashed everyone into thinking he is the almighty god of encoding because he encode long time, good history. Seriously that is all I have ever heard from this guy. Not one technical detail which made sense. "Lawl i'm going to link page that says AVI myths, cause i am right!"

Power2All will always be laughable unless he learns to grow up and actually educate himself. The stubborness doesn't help either.

1) i see no reason it trying it. Going on with this just to prove his wrong it a bit over the top in my eyes.

2) what are you guys talking about "brainwashed everyone". I dont know the guy is nor do i know or care about the history your talking about here. i just find it pointless to continue when 2 threads have been closed.

I personaly prefure avi over mkv. No reason attached i just think its easier to watch

Although a hell of a lot more accepted than H.264, the same hacks also apply for MPEG-4 ASP (better known as DivX or XviD) in AVI (for B-frames). However since ASP is not as advanced as H.264, we do not have features that require more hacks to worry about. In H.264 that amounts to a feature that you cannot use for the sake of VfW compatability, but since ASP doesn't have it to begin with, ASP isn't as crippled by AVI/VfW as H.264 can be. In other words ASP is affected by packed frames only, but with H.264 there are some efficiency improving options that you cannot use (currently at least).

If it's discussion you really want, then it's discussion you will get :)
I appreciate that longposts aren't fun to read, but they aren't fun to write either. If you wish for a discussion, please return the favour by reading my posts fully. I'm not out to try and change your mind, after all, what way does that benefit me? None. I'm doing this purely because I enjoy encoding, discussing and have an opportunity to help someone out at the same time. I attempt to present the facts, why H.264 in AVI is not a good idea, and how other methods can benefit you, your team and your leechers. If you still stick with AVI, then that is your choice. I hope you will consider everything before you commit yourself.

I can't speak for other people, but in my eyes the only so called "ruleset" which you aren't following is MPEG's. If MPEG deemed AVI suitable, they would have specified it. H.264 is obviously specified in .MP4; and also MPEG updated their older MPEG-2 standard to allow for H.264; this was H.264 in MPEG-2 transport streams (.TS). In laymens terms an MPEG-2 transport stream is like a .mpg which has extra features for streaming such as Digital TV (DVB, Satellite, etc). The support is so widespread for MPEG-2 TS that it causes less disruption to make amendments to this old standard rather than implement MP4 in set top boxes and such.

Of course no one can force you to do things a certain way. "He" might be someone that is unbiased, an enthusiast encoder, and/or someone who simply wants non hacky encodes. Not everyone who suggests MKV or MP4 simply dislikes AVI, most have good reasons. As for compatible format, the fact that you need hacks for it to work should set alarm bells ringing that it's not capable and therefore not compatible; but I wonder, what with AVI splitters being installed on every Windows computer since 1991, if what you really mean is interoperable. A compatible/interoperable format would be H.264 + AAC in MP4. MP4 is designed to be interoperable, just like .MPG is/was .MP4 is the official successor to .MPG, and as such .MP4 is backward compatible and can also store MPEG-1/MPEG-2 audio and video encodes. H.264 in MKV would come in a close second since it is capable of storing H.264 in it's standardised format, only concern if any is lack of commercial support for the actual container, but with directshow this isn't too much of a problem providing the end user knows what they need for MKV files. AVI comes last due to it requiring hacks. This is not my opinion, this is fact.

Did I understand, or did you not read my post? I don't know what's going on anymore. If I did not understand it, then please elaborate so that I might do. I am genuinely curious, not just calling your bluff so the expression goes.

Some of us are trying to help you out, believe it or not. You may not "need" them as such, but you can benefit from them. How can you benefit? More efficient compression allows you to increase the quality for the same filesize, or alternatively lower the filesize and keep the same quality. It's completely up to you how you decide to use the gained efficiency; but if I understand correctly, the idea of lowering filesizes appeals to you. Of course if you lower the filesize, it means less data to distro, less data for the leechers to download, and less harddrive/CD/DVD space used. This is why people suggest other methods to you, because it is otherwise "looking a gifthorse in the mouth". There is a free quality upgrade available and you are turning your nose up at it!

As for problems, I can truthfully say that everyone that has downloaded my encodes and used CCCP has never had a problem. Even VLC users have not had any issues. MP4 itself is hugely documented, so third parties and opensource developers have detailed information on how and what to implement. It helps avoid confusion and bugs. MKV is also very well documented, especially considering these are just guys doing it as a hobby. Problems tend to stem from people using whack builds of FFDShow and enabling decoders that they don't need, or that conflict with other software. The CCCP staff compile and test FFDShow themselves. Most people who compile FFDShow don't test it extensively, so that's why you will often find problems with codec packs such as klite. MP4 has been around since 1998, and support these days is very good. CCCP is a "no brain required" installer which will install support for the common containers and codecs associated with the fansub/DVD world, so there isn't a problem anymore really. Give it a try sometime.

I think people are waiting for you to give other methods a try, or give some solid reasons why you do not even want to try them. If it's something as simple as you don't want to try other software aside from Virtualdub then tell us. There is other good software which will let you make non hacky files which isn't too dissimilar to Virtualdub if you are willing to try it.



Rather than quoting facts and figures, I'd like to perform a little experiment. Numbers and specs are nice, but it's impossible to tell how much impact it does or doesn't have on an encode. How about seeing how AVI affects you?

Don't worry, the purpose of this is not to ridicule your encoding methods at all. This is experimental now, so it's not like people are in a position to say "lol your encodes are crap" because the chances are, you wouldn't release what I'm about to get you to encode. I understand that lowering filesizes appeals to you (as does to me, but I don't want to sacrifice quality unnecessarily for it); so that's what we're going to do; encode a source with strict yet flexible criteria (partly because the encode I will be comparing with is already encoded). We will then stand back and look at our encodes and the differences between them. The differences should amount to less efficient encoding for the AVI version. We will not be analysing stuff like colour saturation, sharpness or anything superficial like that, we will simply look at artifacts caused by compression inefficiencies between the AVI and MP4 version. This will be things like blocking or smearing in the video, and ringing or flange in the audio. These are typical artifacts caused by insufficient bitrate (a side effect of container overhead or less advanced motion compensation modes). Because H.264 has an inloop deblocking filter, you will need to pay special attention to the high motion areas for artifacts rather than static areas. I find these artifacts hard to describe. Perhaps you could call it oversmoothed blocking, smudging or something to that effect. You will know what it is when you see it, it is usually noticable on fades.

This is a highly un-scientific test, so I don't want people saying "OMG you aren't doing it fairly". This "bit of fun" test, is just to show the various ways in which AVI can hold you back, or to look at it another way, to highlight the features/improvements in modern containers and how they assist you.

Do I have your interest yet?

I hope that you will take part in this little experiment in good faith. Remember that this is not for the purpose of making you look like a bad encoder. I don't care how good or bad you are. The purpose is to show how AVI limits your options, and essentially, the efficiency. Providing you are up for it, I will go on to list the criteria. You are expected to use the methods you use for your releases, but if you have to modify what you do due to my requirements, that is fine; however I believe that this is within your capability. The encoded file should preferably be made publicly available, for instance web space, rapidshare, yousendit etc. I will also idle in the #kisssub channel, you can send it to me there, or ask any questions.

Here is the source file:
http://forums.darkside-raws.net/gettorrent...%5D.avi.torrent

Get it ASAP, I am currently seeding.

Criteria to be met for .hack//Roots test encode

Video specifics

• Video must have a vertical resolution of 576 lines and maintain a 16:9 DAR. Horizontal resolution may not be lower than 720 lines.
• Selective decimation/VFR may be used, providing it is not detrimental to the full motion sections. This rules out basic decimation/frame rate conversion.
• Light spatial/temporal averaging may be used only. No other filters besides resizing the source to 576 lines.
• Must use a recent build of x264 VfW. Suggest referring to doom9.org for suggestions for high quality encoding. User may use his own settings.

Audio specifics

• Samplerate on playback must be 48KHz stereo.
• Audio must not be low pass filtered (the encoder will do this, but it is excused).
• Audio must not be normalised or otherwise altered.

General

• Filesize of muxed audio and video should ideally be no larger than 86.2MB (90,391,788 bytes) (52 episodes per DVD+R spec), However this is not critical.
• Only the source file found at http://forums.darkside-raws.net/gettorrent...%5D.avi.torrent may be used

Any takers?

http://forums.tokyotosho.com/index.php/topic,944.0.html

This shows how lame people can be if someone speaks his own mind out.
People need to grow up more and start accepting other people's believes.

Just in case you didn't already get it Power2All, speaking your mind doesn't change reality. AVI is not meant to hold H.264. No matter how much this becomes your opinion, alternative, choice, or feeling it is not meant to be. You and you alone are the soul person who thinks so.

♦You could ask pengvado the developer of x264, he would agree that it would not be a good idea. He did initially create the x264 VfW implementation BUT stopped development of it and refused to continue to work on it because it shouldn't have been created in the first place. If you actually had an open mind you would have found out the x264 CLI has more options then the VfW implementation because of this very reason. Development stopped on it long ago.
♦You could ask the people of Doom9, they would say no (except for DeathTheSheep, the VfW maniac). All other prominent individuals in the community would clearly tell you no.
♦You could ask alexnoe the creator of AVIMux GUI which you linked to, and he would say no.
♦You could go and email the MPEG/ITU groups the people who wrote the specifications of the formats, and they would say no.
♦You could of course ask your fellow peers (anime encoders) and get their educated opinion on the subject. Most who are knowledgable on the subject of video storage will say NO.

Or you could go off and do whatever you please and ask your staff (or god forbid leeches). Individuals who may be wonderful people but have NO knowledge on the subject whatsoever. Then you treat the decision as "just another alternative" and ignore everything. Maybe you just treat it as "too late now can't turn back" which is about as stupid as making a bad decision in the first place. If I were a pompous asshole doing whatever I please after I got the "go ahead" from other staff, but then I found out the x264 developer thought H.264 in AVI was a bad idea, as well as alexnoe (someone who knows far more about AVI then whatever I call an "alternative") I probably would have stopped right there. I don't believe myself to know better than them. You seem to though.

You are the one who has been ignoring everything anyone has said since day one. You are the one who is lame. Don't make this into some bullshit about accepting other people's beliefs. You've already shown how ignorant you can be and you will reap the fruit of your ignorance in the future.

You know what you are doing ?
Trying to go thru a mental attack.
If you think your right, whatever.
Read the topic I just posted and read it carefull.
Whatever you say I don't care.
Why do I say this ?
Because I am not the only one blaming MKV for bad compability.
Why should I listen to others that are working way different then how I work ?
As you may have noticed, we decided to stick with AVI.
How hard and loud you speak is not of my matters anymore.
I ignore you yes, for being a disturbing, little bug that keeps pushing me.

My answer: Whatever

P2A, the problem is that you fail to even understand or acknowledge our arguments.

You fail lack of reading and communicating.
Keep on flaming moron.

This is turning into a war again instead of a discussion. If you cant discuss the topic quietly stop remaking the topic

Actually no.
The whole discussion on TokyoTosho was peaceful.
I posted my own oppinion as stated in the reply itself.
Some moron called Starsk started the war with someone else because of the going-out-of-hand issue on AnimeSuki.
The whole topic on TT was a oppinion thread which they made a flame-thread from.

There isn't much of a discussion when the other person refuses to answer. You should have seen that coming since post one. The only responses I have seen to make a so called discussion are "it doesn't matter it's just another option", "the group has already decided end of conversation", or "stop the mental attacks, accept my believes!" . Slightly paraphrased. That would be hilarious if P2A was actually part of the conversation.

bla bla bla bla.
You ever listen to yourself ?

Hey, I just wanted to pop in and thank Power2All for being steadfast in using the AVI container. I hate MKV and OGM and whatever junk fansubbers do to screw up MP4s because my QuickTime can't open them. So thanks for thinking of us Mac OS X users!

Well. there we go.
I don't think of using other containers because of THIS EXACT REASON.
Thanks for pointing it down ;)

I have to say I'm very dissapointed that Power2All has not shown willing in taking part in the encode I was asking him to make. In fact I find it downright rude that he has completely ignored the post (which took a while to type) as if it didn't exist, rather than replying with something along the lines of, "I appreciate that you are trying to illustrate the differences in our methods and how my methods hold me back, but I'll opt out of this experiment of yours". Decline politely or something to that effect.

As for MP4, we are doing things to spec. Our files are playable in any non gay player/splitter/decoder combination. The problem lies with Quicktime itself, they only support Main profile H.264, and most encoders use High profle (since FFDShow/CoreAVC/Nero/VLC/etc. support it). Blame Apple for partial implementation of a H.264 decoder, not the encoders wanting to maximise efficiency/quality. Slightly off topic, but IIRC Bluray and HD-DVD have to support High Profile H.264; presumably pre-recorded discs will be making use of goodies like 8x8, so Apple had better fix their decoder sometime.

BTW, what are you playing AVI fansubs in on Mac?

1) I am not a noob, meaning I can encode whatever I want to MKV, OGM, MP4 wihtout help if neccassery.

Why I ignored it is because I have not much time for everybody to encode them something just to have them proven right.
As I already stated, yes I playback MKV and all other formats too, and I have no problems with them. This doesn't mean that other people have problems with them.
As stated above, it should be clearly that I go for the users point of view and not for the encoders point of view.

If you want me to encode that thingy, you should give me some time since I have a little lack of time lately.

I don't recall calling you a noob or offering help; no need to get paranoid. Not everyone who posts in a thread suggesting something other than your methods is automatically flaming you.

Again, I'm not getting you to encode this to prove me right, I already know the outcome, it's just a fun little challenge for you to take part in *if you wish*, to show you the difference it makes. It could take a while to encode, so I'm not pushing you to do it; and I can understand where you're coming from with lack of time, that's a big part which has kicked my fansubbing activities into touch.

As I said it could take a while to encode, to save you some time, I would resize the video first and encode it with a lossless codec (and possibly any other filtering while you are at it), then load up the lossless and encode from that (which is already filtered, so in effect you are encoding without filters). You won't believe the amount of people that use a filtered AVS file for their multipass encodes and complain how slow it is (because it's running through the video twice with all the filters, the other method does it once, and then you encode from an "unfiltered" video.

Ill explain how I do my encodes.
First I get the raw in whatever format I get it.
I encode it to lossless (lagarith in this case) with filters to make the RAW look more eye appealing and poke away the artifacts and so on.
then I start encoding to the codec it should be with the subtitles and overlays and whatever there is to the final format (xvid and/or h.264) with highest settings in the codec.
This way, you get less issues and slowing down stuff as you mentioned above.

I do this, after having experimented a lot in the past. ;)