[Daniel Low]

What Quicktime settings are you using in cleaner. What’s your source?

[Daniel Low]

IMHO there is little out there, at this end of the market, better than Procoder ‘mastering quality’. How good is your source?

[Daniel Low]

Can you supply us with the rest of the encoding profile – eg frame size, what kind of content is it (talking heads or sports etc)

keyframes every 24 frames is way too frequent – should be more like every 240 frames..

It’s a London thing.

[Daniel Low]

I would avoid using cleaner for MPEG-2 encoding at all costs.

Try removing cleaner from the equation and see if your results are better.

It’s a London thing.

[Daniel Low]

Aharon,

What you say is true, however if quality is a main consideration, Flash is quite a way off the mark when compared to either WMV or H.264.

[Daniel Low]

H.264 and WMV are roughly the same quality and efficency – if you don’t know who your audience are then I’d probaly go for WMV, simply due to the number of windows machines out there.

You’ll need to do alot of experimentation with data rates and frame sizes before you’ll find something you’re satisfied with, there is no set of magic numbers.

Streaming – quality of the video is determined by the viewers connection speed, slower connection speed means lower quality and more buffering
Progressive download – quality is determined by the content producer (you), on a slower connection it will take longer before the clip will start playing but the quality will be the same as all other connection speeds.

It’s a London thing.

[Daniel Low]

640×360
23.98fps
H.264 at approx 909.25Kbit/s
AAC Audio @44.1Khz

It’s a London thing.

[Daniel Low]

In fact I’m a Mac user, not a MAC user (sorry but I can’t understand why so many people want to capitalise ‘Mac’!), but I also run a PC. However I’ve used Procoder under both Crossover and bootcamp, not Parallels and it works fine.

[Daniel Low]

Procoder set to ‘mastering’ mode is head and shoulders above the rest. It offers very high quality along with blistering speed.
I’d give it a 9 out of 10, the others between 6 and 7 out of 10

It’s a London thing.

[Daniel Low]

My my, you are rather condescending aren’t you!

From your wiki link:

BD has a much higher maximum data transfer rate, supports (the optional) DTS-HD at double the data rate of HD-DVD.

BD can do Dolby Digital at 640kbps vs the 504kbps maximum of HD-DVD

HD-DVD has to spin much faster to reach the same transfer rates as BD

How can you ignore the higher capacity of BD?

Did I mention BD+

BD has a far superior (albeit expensive) coating.

One thing that HD-DVD has that Blu-Ray misses is the ability to do 25p & 30p

But, hey, it’s the public who’ll end up making a winner, according to DVDempire.com the stats are

Week: Blu-ray 57.29%, HD-DVD 42.71%
Month: Blu-ray 60.52%, HD-DVD 39.48%
Year: Blu-ray 61.48%, HD-DVD 38.52%

Titles: Blu-Ray 249, HD-DVD 221

Neilsen: Blu-ray outselling HD-DVD 2:1
https://news.digitaltrends.com/news/story/12412/nielsen_blu-ray_outselling_hd_dvd

In Japan, Blu-ray owns 96% of the HD market:
https://wesleytech.com/blu-ray-takes-96-of-the-japanese-market/40/

Ninety six percent!

Blu-ray – over 70% of the market.
https://www.itpro.co.uk/storage/news/111278/bluray-takes-lions-share-of-highdef-market.html

Basically, HD-DVD as it is now is as good as it’s going to get. With Blu-Ray however it’s just going to get better as the profiles are upgraded.

And I’ll repeat, the PS3 is Blu-Ray, even if it was an inferior technology it’ll come out on top for this fact alone.

It’s a London thing.