Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: übermetroid on December 18, 2003, 04:44:36 pm
-
I dont know where else to put this so I thought it should go here.
Where would I find the best AVI to DIVX converter? The one to do the FS2 movies would be great.
Thanks! :cool:
-
Virtual dub should do the work, if you wants to spare the people from downloading divx codec (plus the usual spyware) you may try Windows Media Encoder, which outputs WMV and is at least as good as Divx (wait until Kazan will see this and he'll starts roaring fire and flames)...
WMV encoding tips can be found in the developers section of the website in my signature.
-
WMV is good and yes widely supported, but I'd stick with XviD codecs.
-
Yes, xvid is another good choice, what is the last version anyways?
-
WMA is good, but does it work inside of FS OPEN?
-
The cutscenes works with any installed codec...
-
no kidding? I thought they had to be Divx. That was why the cutscenes that are on the FTP site are Divix.
Interesting. I will have to test that out.
-
I can convert your cutscene if you want, just give me a download link...
-
Originally posted by Zarax
I can convert your cutscene if you want, just give me a download link...
Zarax, thanks but currently the files are too big to put up. And with my 26.6K internet EVERYTHING takes forever to do.
These are not my cutscenes by the way, but the ones from FS1. :D
Oh and you are right about any AVI plays in Open... Thats so cool!
-
Ok...
Then i suggest you to look at the DVD to WMV (just ignore the ripping part) tutorial at www.microsoftusernetwork.com/zarax
-
[q]what is the last version anyways?[/q]
Depends who's binary you're using - unless you compile the source yourself from xvid website
-
Originally posted by ubermetroid
no kidding? I thought they had to be Divx. That was why the cutscenes that are on the FTP site are Divix.
The cutscenes are DivX cause I asked which encoding would be best and no one not to use DivX :D
-
Zarax I don't know wheter you are one of the MS worshippers and I don't really care if you believe WMA or WMV to be superior.
For aside any performance considerations there's one reason why not to use them: you can't convert them to anything else once you've encoded them.
If you argue that DivX or Xvid is lame, let me remind you that they're actually the same code.
People ripped the codec of the wmv in it's early days because the encoder MS shipped with it was simply ridiculous.
My personal shun of MS native codecs comes from this reason alone.
This also means you can't use Virtual Dub and other derivates of it to encode.
However pls. don't try to convince me that the MS encoder is on par with Nandub.
I don't doubt wheter the performance of the things you mention are on par with DivX, Xvid ect. but there are other factors aside sheer performance.
MS codecs could be good for someone who just wants to encode his files once, and be done with it.
But they lack the flexibility thanks to built in MS restrictions that other tools offer.
In other words, I think MS once again crippled it's software with poor marketing.
BTW for the same reason the whol OGG/Mp3/WMA issue was lame.
WMA could be the best of the three - but with shoulnd't use it as long as it needs a licencse.
The same goes for Mp3 unfortunately, and we're stuck with OGG which is said to be just as good, even better than MP3, but it has its fair deal of problems thanks to its constant development and non-fixed standard.
On another side note I think you've misconcepted the general reason why people prefer MP3: you don't just convert a file, it's not a predefined method, rather a wide array of choices.
WMA once again suffers from MS marketing.
However I'm inclined to believe it has better results on lower bitrates.
On the other hand, what people want is small size, not small bitrate when listening to music - well aside from actual broadcast, but even than size is what matters.
At higher bitrates MP3 so far handles better when properly encoded in VBR format.
As the end of this pointless tirade let me state two things:
-MS codecs are in constant development
-So are other codecs.
-
Zarax, I was havving trouble loading your site (26.6k, remember?) so I went ahead and used Virtual dub. It worked quite well and I was able to batch convert all the FS1 MVEs into nice sized DivXs.
Thanks for the help!
-
If you argue that DivX or Xvid is lame, let me remind you that they're actually the same code.
Actually no. Divx was created from OpenDivx. Xvid was made by the people left behind when part of opendivx became DivxNetworks. Most of Xvid was actually rewritten =/
Currently XviD is in the beta state for version 1.0 (aka dev-api-4). Beta3 should be released soon. In any case, when 1.0 is released it should be a rather complete release that would be superior to the current dev-api-3 builds (nic's, koepi's and umaniac's builds). If you'd like to try the beta, I believe Koepi has beta2 on his site.
Frankly, it doesn't really matter whether you use XviD or DivX, both are good and it's in fact possible to play back both using each other's codecs if you don't use GMC.
-
Well, in this scenario i don't think more than one conversion was required, and anyways any encoder expert knows how bad are the results of a re-encoding, unless the encoder is optimized for the specific scenario...
About WMV restrictions, i don't know you are talking about, i use WMV in all places, from DVD backup to internet streaming without problems, just turn off DRM in your player and you'll be fine.
I'm not here to argue whetever is better, i just stated that WMV doesn't require to download additional codecs (if needed WMP will autoupdate).
About licensing, i cared to ask to MS Windows Media guys, and i happily discovered that for non commercial use there are no fees as long as you will use it in a windows environment...
If some coders are interested (Bobbau?) i can forward you the licensing info...
About encoders, there is the WMV VCM codec that can be used (for video only) in any encoder, virtual Dub too...
The only real problem is the "if it comes from MS then is ****" syndrome, which prevents most people from seeing things just as they are...
And finally, about me being a MS worshipper, you can call me that if you want, but i'm one of the few people who use reasonable manners with MS, and i'm leading an user project aimed to make MS more sensitive to the users needs and in the long term embrace the open source movement...
It's an hard as hell proposition but it's much better than shouting around against MS and try to force every user project (especially open source ones) to go into linux, like many borg-ish zealots are doing everywhere.
You can agree with me or you cannot, i respect your opinions, just do the same please.
-
Originally posted by Flaser
Zarax I don'tPeople ripped the codec of the wmv in it's early days because the encoder MS shipped with it was simply ridiculous.
On the other hand, what people want is small size, not small bitrate when listening to music - well aside from actual broadcast, but even than size is what matters.
At higher bitrates MP3 so far handles better when properly encoded in VBR format.
As the end of this pointless tirade let me state two things:
-MS codecs are in constant development
-So are other codecs.
I agree with you, but there are some things you're missing:
1) The codecs have evolved up to the 9 version, and if you use the real encoder (not the lame ones you can find in plus or WMP addons), which is free too (and without spyware unlike divx pro) you can obtain much better results, expecially with VBR or the Professional Codec (just avoid the preset profiles).
2) Size is proportional to bitrate (and time), so higher bitrates means larger size
-
Zarax is a M$-Whore haha, i knew it from the start and now i see his site
hahahahahahahaha
I should have known only someone being _PAID_ by microsoft would whore-their piece of trash codecs -- not only are they lossy trash but they are propertary.
Think what you like Zarax, I have 10 years of good reasons why microsoft sucks and should eat **** and die.
I bet you're a republican too? :P
-
...what does someone's political affiliation have anything to do with anything? My family's Republican. Oddly enough poor republicans, but republican none the less.
-
Kazan, now you've got my patience out.
Shut up your borg linuxer mouth, and at least sell your ass to IBM quietly like you should.
I'm not paid by anyone except those companies who wants their COBOL apps upgraded, next time you want to show how lame you are go in a true professional forums and see how they will greet you.
And about my political affiliation, i'm a labourist, so you are only showing how many prejudices you got.
-
lol, the SCP forum has really become entertaining during the code freeze. You see people jumping down other peoples throats at a moments notice...
Hold on, I have to sneeze, who's gonna rip me for it?
-
Say you like MS and Kazan will do
-
Originally posted by ubermetroid
Where would I find the best AVI to DIVX converter?
Point of clarification-- AVI is not a codec. It's a generic wrapper format which can accept any properly-written codec. Asking for an AVI to DIVX converter is like asking for a DOC to Helvetica converter.
That being said, it's generally a bad, bad, bad idea to convert from one lossy video format to another, because the compression artifacts in the source video will be retained and possibly exaggerated by the destination codec, in addition to adding its own compression artifacts. You really only get good results from this when working with extremely high-quality source media.
-
[color=cc9900]Linux is IBM, Linux is the borg/matrix? Somebody's been watching too many Microsoft promotional videos. Microsoft aren't the little guys.
To make this relevant, I'll add my one experience with Microsoft video codecs, while trying to make something a DivX to make it smaller and change the resolution, was that I was prevented from doing so. In my knowledge, that isn't very user-friendly.[/color]
-
Zarax - the rupublican part was a wise crack - i think about as highly of the average republican as a I think of bush though -- not very well sociologically or economically informed
As for you, you're outright brainwashed - any _DECENT programmer knows microsoft is a lead of steaming horse crap. Of course you are a COBOL programmer, keep playing with your language that's been obsolete for 35 years.
You've been trying to argue file formats with someone who's main focus is programming is file formats - optimized file formats for games typically. I also do game programming because I learn.
------------------
Linux the borg.. lol
The Linux Community wants to take over the world - by merit (unborglike)
The Linux Commuty wants to be perfected by review of many voices (unborglike)
Linux
Microsoft wants to take over the world with a single iron fist under the direction of Bill Gates (borg queen) -- Borglike
Microsoft wants to bring everyone into "their perfection" without people agreeing that it's perfection -- Borglike
Microsoft crushes the opposition by any means possible -- Borglike
----------------
Did anyone see that RealNetworks Filed lawsuit against Microsoft for Antitrust violations.
-
Ok, ok....I think there's merit to both of the opinions.
Don't even get started!
It doesn't really matter which is true as long as MS screws customers with a stupid marketing a policy and ends up screwing themselves.
As for the Linux bunch - they're a bunch. There are restrictions on what a huge bunch of people can do compared to a company.
That said if you want to continue take it to another thread.
IMHO there's merit to what Zarax says about the actual performance - or even encoding options of the MS stuff - it's just the compability issue we're really bothered by....
As for you MP3 bitrate comment Zarax, I said VBR = Variable Bitrate.
I don't see the point of going over which codec is superior in low constant bitrate encoding - why when you can compress much more economically with an adaptive tool?
This is the very reason why I hold Nandub in high regards - mind you I haven't played with recent MS codecs, so you could be right Zarax!
....and before you go on Kazaan!
Please try them out....although I'm inclined to believe you that as usual the MS ego syndrome created smg. so incompatible that it can be a real pain in the ass to code with it.
That's the breaktrhough of Mp3 and IMHO the future, unfortunately you can't really use a VBR stream with videos, but hopefully someone will finally write a player that handles the audio stream differently.
-
Originally posted by Kazan
Did anyone see that RealNetworks Filed lawsuit against Microsoft for Antitrust violations.
[color=cc9900]Yep. Link:
http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/031218/1725001407_1.html
I love it when someone with a faint chance of winning challenges someone who purports invincibility. Good on RealNetworks.[/color]
-
The fact i work with COBOL doesn't mean i don't know anything "new"...
Java and C are very well known friends, but it doesn't matter...
The sole fact you linux zealots are always shouting around shows where the brainwashing works...
You said you have ten years of hate against Microsoft?
Well, it's since 1983 that i despise the International Borg Mob also known as IBM, and while you dream about MS destruction linux is a mere tool in the hands of the only software company who made an operating systems with the sole attempt to transform PCs into mainframe extensions...
What you may not know is that history is just coming again, this time with centralized servers instead of mainframes...
So, keep dreaming about your freeware world, one day you may awake and discover that GPL has been ripped away and you are surrounded by a bunch of monopolists...
About realnetworks, his founder and ceo is just an ex Microsoft manager who built his company trying to get ahead MS using internal info...
Tu quoque Brutus, fili mi...
-
Flaser, the problem is much deeper than this...
MS may not be the fairest player ever known, but everyone forgets that they become what they are because people preferred them, and not because anyone forced them...
Here is a little history:
1975-1980
More than MS it was IBM versus Apple, and basically IBM won the market thanks to lower prices...
They chose MS DOS because it was the only one both "user friendly" (for the time) and fitting for IBM future plans (fortunately they failed)
1983
MS-IBM separation.
Basically IBM dumped MS because they were launching they superuberduper OS2, known to the experts as IBM market domination 2.0.
Basically they got the core functions of Windows 1.0 (still in development) and tried to make something capable to run on both PCs and mainframes... they did it, but the problem was that it was slow as hell (15 minutes to boot) and the forced compatibility stripped down 90% of potential features, making it pratically a featureless mainframe consolle (oh yeah, we can port any mainframe app on OS2! Look! it takes only 5 minutes to start!).
That made just MS in the right place, being cheaper than apple but still many times better than IBM software (and in the meantime a 12 years long antitrust battled started for IBM...).
That was the reason of MS spreading into the PC world, and retrocompatibility did the rest...
Before someone starts complaining about Mac being ubercool and MS that copied from apple, the thruth is that both companies copied from Xerox, who made an experimental GUI OS for IBM before MS was chosen, but that was dumped...
1983-1995
Well, that was the most known DOS era, even though developers progressively complained about memory management, so that a 32bit OS was needed...
1995-today
Well, you know as much as myself what happened after 1995... due to software stability problems people started to dislike MS stuff, though when treated and cared well Win 9.x wasn't that unstable...
In the meantime antitrust started for MS too first with netscape (lol, and people complained because MS forced the browser market to run freeware... just like part of the linux community would do for everything), DOJ finally settled them, then AOL started again (they lost their monopolistic ISP position and blamed MS for that), and that one was settled too...
Realnetworks is just the same... if you wanna make cash blame MS... they complain because people won't pay for their player!
About the rest, kazan and me express prett clearly the different visions of the things...
-
Originally posted by Zarax
1983
MS-IBM separation.
Basically IBM dumped MS because they were launching they superuberduper OS2, known to the experts as IBM market domination 2.0.
[color=cc9900]I was under the impression that Microsoft dumped IBM during the development period of OS/2, not the other way around. And an expert would realise that OS/2 was designed to be natively 16-bit, while DOS at the time was 8-bit. It was not a market domination strategy, I do however know one company that used and still uses plenty of market domination strategies... Guess who?[/color]
Originally posted by Zarax
1995-today
In the meantime antitrust started for MS too first with netscape (lol, and people complained because MS forced the browser market to run freeware... just like part of the linux community would do for everything)
[color=cc9900]You think people complaining for being forced to use something, even though it's free, is wrong? Uhh... Excuse me for saying so, but what? Sure it was free, turds are free, and I don't fancy having turds forced down my throat! The Linux community isn't about freeware, it's about open source. Nothing is forced on anyone, as you get so much variety and if it doesn't suit you, you change it!
I find it amusing that you've only highlighted the 'positives' in Microsoft's history. [/color]
-
Waits to see Zarax put a good spin on what MS tried to do with Java.
-
I don't remember anyone forcing you to use anything, or are there men in black with a gun that shoots who is not using MS software?
I would say the opposite...
I'm hearing more and more people threathened by hackers, who says that they will DOS (Denial of service) their servers if they do not use linux...
If you believe to the IBM/linux propaganda that MS dumped IBM in 1983 then i will just remember that MS had 30 employees at the time, while IBM... 30000? I guess more.
Anyways, this thread is only becoming a flame, admin please close it, the topic has been solved.
-
[color=cc9900]I don't remember any forcing (on anyone with half a clue, at least, so that discounts a fair few people) either, but that's what you said, so that's what I commented on.
Those hackers are both a rare occurence (never heard of them myself), and a good thing if they exist. They're helping the community, exposing security holes so things can be made better. Due to development cycles, this means updating to Linux and regularly patching.
MS did dump IBM, and employees have nothing to do with it. Microsoft didn't even develop DOS themselves, it's small wonder they bailed out soon after being asked to develop the GUI for OS/2.
I don't, personally, think this thread is becoming a flame. It's an interesting crossfire of opinions, which is (loosely) connected to the original post.[/color]
-
Originally posted by Odyssey
It's an interesting crossfire of opinions, which is (loosely) connected to the original post.[/color] [/B]
:welcome:
;)
-
Actually, MS was only an external added developer for IBM, so when MS proposed Windows 1.0 as GUI system for IBM they refused it and continued with OS2, breaking the agreements.
Whatever you think, you cannot dump someone bigger than you...
Correctly, MS did not fully develop MS-DOS, they bought a software originally called Q-DOS and refined it, but this is not a mistery.
About hackers, a DOS attack do not exploit or help discovering any hole, what they do is simply flooding a server with requests so that it overloads...
Given the IP address and a small program every lamer can do it...
What i was talking about is the fact that hackers use DOS as a method to force people to swap to linux or stopping using/talking about MS techs...
Say watherever you want about MS commercial policy but they never used these mafia-like methods with people...
Another thing people has difficulties to understand is that open source DoesNotMeanLinux, and there are some (small) Windows based communities, who are not interested in changing system.
Far from being paid by MS (something that wouldn't be so bad imho) instead of trying to destroy Microsoft i'm one of those that believes in dialogue, and prefers to work in order to improve MS tech rather than rebuilding everything from scratch, with the risk of loosing standards, and fall back in the eighties, where unexperienced users did not know if the software they buy would run on their OS or not.
Anyways, i consider the thread expired as it was related to video conversion tips, and not a MS vs linux debate...
Plus the facts that things gets quite hot because kazan and me have totally opposite views on the subjects and somehow every time we are on the same thread any hope of a reasonable "conversation" is lost...
-
[color=cc9900]The point of an argument is to convince the other side to come around to your point of view. While I severely fundamentally disagree with what you say, feel you have misinterpreted some things I said, and think you've got some facts wrong, I see you won't be swayed, hence arguing will be futile on my part. Enjoy your opinion, I'll enjoy mine.[/color]
-
See, it's like every side is fighting a crusade... It will pretty much neve end, until one part will emerge as victorious...
-
[color=cc9900]I know which side I'm rooting for.[/color]