x264VfW 44.2851 reviews
Write a Review
4.8
from 5 Reviews
IJ
Why not make a ffdshow api in virtual dub? this is very good and handy software but has still vfw.
is not vfw video for win?pls name 4 me the next technology other than ffdshow that comes to replace it in windows
MI
Thanks for keeping the vfw version alive and up to date!
I still don't see a reason for me to drop VD(M), so I'm very happy to get a new x264vfw once in a while!
Tnx for that!
I still don't see a reason for me to drop VD(M), so I'm very happy to get a new x264vfw once in a while!
Tnx for that!
K4
Some says that VFW is dead.
But I dare to say it is not for VirtualDub users.
In fact, VFW encoders could give more accessability in various video editing applications.
I'd like to thank the devs for giving us that accessabilty again.
The old x264VFW didn't support decompression, so FFVFW or AVISynth was needed for VFW editor.
Not any more.
Now x264VFW support decompression as well as compression.
The same quality of x264-encoded-file with much less bitrate than Divx or XviD is possible.
Personally I haven't noticed such a drastic improvement with WVC1.
Unfortunately x264 is very slow in compression and somewhat slow in decompression.
And I'm not sure the 'deblocking filter' really increases quality. It demands more CPU load in decoding level. So what is the difference with postprocessing? Postprocessing can't make quality increases, right?
I know it's my ignorance... but I normally turn off 'deblocking filter' in x264 encoding. Only when the source file is really blocky, I turn it on.
But I dare to say it is not for VirtualDub users.
In fact, VFW encoders could give more accessability in various video editing applications.
I'd like to thank the devs for giving us that accessabilty again.
The old x264VFW didn't support decompression, so FFVFW or AVISynth was needed for VFW editor.
Not any more.
Now x264VFW support decompression as well as compression.
The same quality of x264-encoded-file with much less bitrate than Divx or XviD is possible.
Personally I haven't noticed such a drastic improvement with WVC1.
Unfortunately x264 is very slow in compression and somewhat slow in decompression.
And I'm not sure the 'deblocking filter' really increases quality. It demands more CPU load in decoding level. So what is the difference with postprocessing? Postprocessing can't make quality increases, right?
I know it's my ignorance... but I normally turn off 'deblocking filter' in x264 encoding. Only when the source file is really blocky, I turn it on.
Quick heads up: Reviews & comments get a fast check before posting - no spam allowed.
