Daniel Low
Forum Replies Created
-
[Craig Seeman] “If a set supports 720p (1280×720) it’s considered HDTV in USA. Broadcast is either 720p60 or (probably more commonly) 1080i60 (I know 59.94 to be more accurate about both). “
Do you have any guidelines like this?
https://www.eicta.org/fileadmin/user_upload/document/EICTA_-_HD_factsheet_logos.pdf
__________________________________________________________________
Two years from now, spam will be solved. – Bill Gates, World Economic Forum 2004 -
Although they have distributed x264 processing working on Windows via the a command line, I’ve not seen it on Mac or via GUI.
Open source stuff rarely gets any kind of development work done by a big corporate due to the ways and means of OSS. (If a company like Apple makes something like x264 ‘Farm-enabled’ via a GUI would mean that they have to release ALL the source code to the public).__________________________________________________________________
Two years from now, spam will be solved. – Bill Gates, World Economic Forum 2004 -
Interesting. One thing to point out though is the difference between ‘True HD’ and ‘HD capable’ or ‘HD Ready’ and article does not differentiate.
True HD sets must be able to display a full 1080P (24) picture and have a true resolution of 1920×1080 (or higher), HD capable or HD ready need only to be able to process, and as such down sample the 1080p signal with resolutions far below eg 1024×576.
Too many buyers are conned by this misleading labeling and the industry need a slap on the wrist for this.
(I speak as a member of the EU, things maybe different in the US of A)
__________________________________________________________________
Two years from now, spam will be solved. – Bill Gates, World Economic Forum 2004 -
Ed, you make some good points.
Of course you’ll come across clients who’ll insist on last years technology because updating software in a corporate environment is fraught with problems.
Most large corporations I’ve worked with recently are still stuck with Windows XP for example (not that I blame them!) But for the rest of the world, and I’m referring to the vast majority of public consumers who find updating their version of Flash easy (it’s actually very easy), we should be delivering the best bang for the buck, and that is H.264. 18 months ago I would have been arguing that the worlds CPUs weren’t ready for the extra decode requirements of H.264, and to stick to what On2 had to offer but I believe that now it’s a different story.[Ed Dooley] “Jan Ozer did a review for Millimeter a while back (last year I think) and had the old VP6 and a beta of the new one, and compared it to H.264 and VC-1. It did much better than VC-1/WM9 and looked as good or better for some things than H.264”
I do actually think VP6 was/is a great codec but for anyone to say that it did better than VC-1 and as good as H.264 has simply got it wrong. VP6 takes advantage of the post-processing available in a lot of Flash players to make video ‘look’ better. H.264 doesn’t use such filters and as such it’s not possible to make a fair comparison without a level playing field.
If you are saying that VP7 is better than VC-1 and the same as H.264 then that’s still of the mark but not by as much. Even so, VP7 or VP8 are very unlikely to ever become part of the Flash spec (or go anywhere in fact) and that kind of makes them pointless for a comparison with H.264. VPx codecs/formats are proprietary let’s not forget!
Jan writes some good stuff but even he gets it wrong, like we all do. I’d much prefer to refer to the testing done by the one and only Dark Shikari who really, really knows what he’s on about.
In the old days the evil Microsoft would have bought On2, pumped VPx full of steroids and offered it up as an alternative in Silverlight, but they obviously saw sense and adopted H.264 instead!
__________________________________________________________________
Two years from now, spam will be solved. – Bill Gates, World Economic Forum 2004 -
You don’t mention the optical flow deinterlacing technique that Compressor uses for its highest quality method.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optic_flow
Aside from this method and ignoring the drop field methods, progressive frames are completed through either averaging or interpolation. High quality method on deinterlace parts of the picture that have movement (motion adaptive).
__________________________________________________________________
Two years from now, spam will be solved. – Bill Gates, World Economic Forum 2004 -
This explains the difference quite well:
https://podcastacademy.com/2007/07/16/final-cut-quicktime-movie-vs-quicktime-conversion-export/
__________________________________________________________________
Two years from now, spam will be solved. – Bill Gates, World Economic Forum 2004 -
[Rich Catena] “Audio: WM Audio 9.2, 32kbps, Sample Size 16, 32k sample rate, Stereo “
Apart from the click the audio must sound pretty terrible, unless it’s something simple like just speech?
I’ve often had problems with clicks when doing a sample rate conversion that isn’t a divisible, like 48k to 32k. 44.1k to 22.050k always works!
Does the same thing happen if you choose mono rather than stereo on the output?
__________________________________________________________________
Two years from now, spam will be solved. – Bill Gates, World Economic Forum 2004 -
[Rami Nasr] “526 by 320 is the size of the video my client requested, it’s to fit in that specific zone on his website.”
FLV and H.264 don’t work well when odd frame sizes are used and in this instance the requested frames size is most likely the reason for the poor picture quality. The frames size he’s given you is neither 4:3 or 16:9 and each side needs to be equally divisible by 16 or 8
You should explian to the client that he should fit his page around the video not the other way around if he wants the quality to be better than it is:
Use the recommended frame sizes that this calculates for you:
https://www.adobe.com/devnet/flash/apps/flv_bitrate_calculator/
__________________________________________________________________
Two years from now, spam will be solved. – Bill Gates, World Economic Forum 2004 -
[Rami Nasr] “My source clip is a 526 width 320”
Can I ask why that size – it’s a totally non-standard size
[Rami Nasr] “keyframe every : 33 frames “
Try every 300 frames.
Do you have any filters applied in Squeeze – like deinterlacing?
__________________________________________________________________
Two years from now, spam will be solved. – Bill Gates, World Economic Forum 2004 -
https://www.borisfx.com/final_cut_pro/bccfxplug/uprez.php
https://www.digitalanarchy.com/resizer/main.html
https://www.redgiantsoftware.com/products/all/magic-bullet-instant-hd/
Etc..
__________________________________________________________________
Two years from now, spam will be solved. – Bill Gates, World Economic Forum 2004