LAV filter vs ffdshow

View previous topic View next topic Go down

LAV filter vs ffdshow

Post by dkazaz on Tue Dec 20, 2011 4:44 am

So I've noticed that in recent versions of the codec pack ffdshow has taken a back seat to Lav filters.

I tend to update every 2-3 versions only if there are no problems so I'm not quite sure when it happened but ffdshow was workig fine for me for several versions now and has a ton of features that LAV doesn't (or if it does, I can't find them), e.g. Lanczos upscaling, image processing etc.

I also notice on doom9 that work on ffdshow has started again witth a new developer which is surely positive, though I know it still has many issues.

I wonder why the decision was made and wanted to ask about the pros/cons and other factors thar went into it.

Thanks for any insights!

dkazaz

Posts : 2
Join date : 2011-06-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LAV filter vs ffdshow

Post by Admin on Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:03 am

Most people don't use the processing functionality. But if you do, then just select ffdshow as the preferred decoder in the installer. Or enable processing of raw video.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 2977
Join date : 2011-06-17

View user profile http://codecs.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

Re: LAV filter vs ffdshow

Post by quiquesam on Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:34 pm

That's somewhat the same question I posted some time ago, I see more cons than pros to LAV filter

quiquesam

Posts : 2
Join date : 2011-09-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LAV filter vs ffdshow

Post by dkazaz on Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:01 pm

I have done exactly that. I dont know about this idea that most people dont use the processing functionality though.

I mean obviously its true, but on the other hand, i know many who do. By the same token, most people don't use Codecs Packs, especially feature rich ones like k-lite. A lot get by on the built in codecs in windows, and maybe install just one thing to watch Mkv. I tend to think the audience of klite are a little more keen on the poweful features it offers. Of course everyone usesndifferent features and many use none, but i think its worth considering this point.

Perhaps this could be a differentiator between the basic and more complex packs (mega etc). For example it might be sensible to differentiate between "basic" and "advanced" offering different options or features. Just a thought.

Thanks for the effort you put into this.

dkazaz

Posts : 2
Join date : 2011-06-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LAV filter vs ffdshow

Post by Admin on Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:05 am

It is the general opinion of the experts that LAV Video decoder is better than ffdshow. The processing functionality of ffdshow can still be used by enabling raw video.

Size of the pack has nothing to do with its complexity.

Upscaling with ffdshow is overrated. You should try madVR renderer if you got a decent graphics card.

Admin
Admin

Posts : 2977
Join date : 2011-06-17

View user profile http://codecs.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

Re: LAV filter vs ffdshow

Post by Sponsored content Today at 9:07 pm


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum