Forum Replies Created

  • Travis Dao

    February 7, 2006 at 10:14 pm in reply to: do think I can get this better? look at link……

    Charles,

    If Squeeze is optimized for the Sorenson 3 codec it doesn’t really show. I’m running a Dell PowerEdge Xeon Dual 2.8 GHz. A 10 minute video that’s encoded using Squeeze’s Sorenson 3 codec takes about 26 minutes. The same video using Cleaner XL encoding takes 8 minutes. Go figure. 8)

    -T

  • Travis Dao

    February 3, 2006 at 12:45 am in reply to: do think I can get this better? look at link……

    I agree their 1.5 upgrade charge is a bit of a rip-off, but one big advantage Cleaner XL has over Squeeze is that it’s optimized for multiple processors. Encoding is way too slow on Squeeze.

  • Travis Dao

    January 31, 2006 at 6:36 pm in reply to: do think I can get this better? look at link……

    Hi Charles,

    I’m curious when you say for QT encoding you’d use Squeeze for the PC, do you mean QT Sorenson Video 3 encodes? From my tests Cleaner XL does better Sorenson QT video quality than Squeeze using the same bit rate.

    -T

  • Travis Dao

    August 1, 2005 at 6:47 pm in reply to: Keyframes relation to file size

    Ben,

    So if I have a fixed bitrate than the file size should remain the same regardless of the number(frequency) of keyframes?
    I’m using 2 pass VBR and the same bitate. These are my test results:

    FLV 10(fps)
    1,626,514 bytes — keyframe every 10 frames
    1,626,955 bytes — keyframe every 20 frames
    1,627,166 bytes — keyframe every 50 frames

    QT 15 (fps)
    2,955,391 bytes — keyframe every 15 frames
    2,712,897 bytes — keyframe every 30 frames
    2,831,045 bytes — keyframe every 75 frames
    2,871,357 bytes — keyframe every 150 frames

    T

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy