Do AVIs Suck?

Discuss about generic usage of MediaCoder.

Moderator: HuggiL

Post Reply
Darksaber11
Beginner
Beginner
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 5:48 am
Location: Maine, US

Do AVIs Suck?

Post by Darksaber11 » Sun Aug 24, 2008 5:57 am

I originally acquired MediaCoder to convert the various video files I have into AVIs so that I could play them on multiple computers without worrying about having the appropriate codecs and players. Since then however, I have been doing some reading about media containers and codecs and it seems to me that AVI is a somewhat inferior format. I am now trying to decide what containers/codecs would be best to convert media into. I am looking to save space without too noticeable a loss of quality.

On a related note. I recently attempted converting some AVI files off my camera into MP4 with H.264 and MP3 codecs, and when I played it in Vista x64 using GOM Player there was no sound. Normally GOM will warn you if there is a sound stream that it cannot play because it is missing the proper codec, but in this case it just played the video with no audio. Any suggestions?
I am the rigid journalist, don't downsize me.

B!ink
Expert
Expert
Posts: 1275
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 9:08 am

Post by B!ink » Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:30 am

Judge for yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison ... er_formats

Even though AVI is an inferior format compared to most modern containers that are out there these days, it still serves it's purpose for certain things.

Example:
Standalone DVD (DivX certified) players, will only playback DivX and MP3 video encapsulated in AVI container.


For the record, I find GOM Player to be flaky at times. My recommendation is Media Player Classic, Haali Media Splitter and FFDShow Tryouts. These combination of programs have yet to fail me on my system.

Darksaber11
Beginner
Beginner
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 5:48 am
Location: Maine, US

Post by Darksaber11 » Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:04 pm

Personally I don't really like Media Player Classic, but I'll give it a try in this case. I've already done a lot of reading on the technical differences between formats (including that wikipedia article) and what I'm looking for is a more subjective opinion.
I am the rigid journalist, don't downsize me.

mixer
Expert
Expert
Posts: 3004
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 4:20 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon USA

Post by mixer » Sun Aug 24, 2008 1:38 pm

I'll chime in on this one too.

Like was said, they have their place. In the "old" days, AVI's and MOV's was about it for wide platform distribution. Then MPEG came along.

For editing I still use AVI's for lossless conversion (Huffyuv codec). And if I know someone with an older OS and player, AVI again. Otherwise MPEG 1 or 2 would also be notable for many OS's.

Once you start using all the fancy codecs that the AVI container can handle, you're looking at updated the OS codecs. Most people don't have a clue on how to do that. Case closed.

That's where MOV or QT and MPEG come into play.

I suppose, I'm a bit old fashioned.

IMO (subjective) there is no one container/codec combination that does it all. So, you always have to think backwards and first determine what your playback and distribution will be.............then use the tools. If you have to, you'll do it several times with different codecs/containers for different end results working from a high quality master.

Post Reply