2006-10-31, 07:58 | Link #601 |
Personal Opinions
|
I give it at most another decade. It took that long for Divx/Xvid to gain popularity in even console/portable players, even with competition (Anyone remember 3vix?). Some CD-burning software support it I'm sure already, and many converters natively, so it's a good sign. Same thing with the MP4 container, despite it being around for awhile. iPod and PSP'll push it up, maybe even Zune (Re: BSOD ). At least they do get along well, easily convertible between formats.
|
2006-10-31, 08:45 | Link #602 |
Personal Opinions
|
Comparison: H.264 vs Xvid
As I said, I'd post a screenshot of a vid encoded in H.264 natively, and the converted Xvid. Both are 640x480, running 29.97 fps. The H.264 has audio that is in AAC, the Xvid: MP3. Here you go:
http://www.immortalmusic.net/snapsho...073428.bmp.jpg The h.264 file http://www.immortalmusic.net/snapshot20061031074328.jpg The Xvid file. What do you think? The only difference in the two files is size to me: Xvid's 2mb larger. |
2006-10-31, 08:47 | Link #603 |
Excessively jovial fellow
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: ISDB-T
Age: 37
|
No, it took about 6 years, and that's counting from the introduction of the then completely new standard MPEG4. MPEG4 was introduced in 1998, XviD started three years later (July 2001), and by 2004 (or possibly earlier) we had DivX-capable DVD players.
__________________
|
2006-10-31, 11:04 | Link #608 | |
Personal Opinions
|
Quote:
|
|
2006-10-31, 15:21 | Link #609 | |
翻訳家わなびぃ
Fansubber
|
Quote:
|
|
2006-10-31, 17:33 | Link #610 | |
Mind Wanderer
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In front of my computer
Age: 52
|
Quote:
One reason being that obvious artifacts in a still frame may be acceptable if they go unnoticed when the video runs. A better codec might look worse on a given frame if it is better at discarding details useless in motion. Other reason being that 2 encodes can place key frames differently. If one of your frame is a keyframe (or a frame close) and the other not, the comparison is biaised. 2) It is not exactly the same frame in your two examples. If you still want to compare frames, the first frame of a scene is a good place as it is easely spotted and is most likely a keyframe. If I remember well from my readings, AVC/h264(x264) over ASP(XviD) is: -3% to 10% better in lossless data compression alone (CABAC). -5% to 20% better in lossy compression itself. But most important here, it deals much better with animated content (hard edges). This alone should make it prime in anime fansubbing. |
|
2006-10-31, 18:03 | Link #611 | |
Gendo died for your sins.
Fansubber
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
There have been rumours on the Internets about PS3's media capabilities. MPEG2 transport streams @ 1920x1080 work fine, and supposedly h264/WMV9 will as well (on the hard disc/burnt media, not over a network IIRC). |
|
2006-10-31, 19:28 | Link #612 | |
Personal Opinions
|
Quote:
Are you talking about the badge on her chest? |
|
2006-10-31, 22:18 | Link #613 | ||
翻訳家わなびぃ
Fansubber
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
2006-10-31, 23:28 | Link #614 |
King of Hosers
Join Date: Dec 2005
Age: 41
|
Well the issue of comparing video with still images aside, lets get two new screencaps. And this time instead of being smart and using some lossless image compression format (PNG) lets go all out and compare gifs! Also lets go ahead and make sure the frames don't match at all, for ultimate comparison purposes! n_n
We must be as unscientific as possible to prove our point to the masses. In the notes of the screencaps be sure to write about your feelings of which looks better, feelings always win. |
2006-11-01, 08:31 | Link #616 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
In regards to HD-DVD & Blue-Ray media; If you think that sticking an HD-DVD or Blue-Ray player in your current computer will give you H.264 playback capabilities, you should read this article. http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/..._hdcp_support/
Even the current crop so called H.264 ready video cards will not support it. |
2006-11-01, 08:35 | Link #617 | |
I see what you did there!
Scanlator
|
Quote:
Almost everything is now in true HD.
__________________
|
|
2006-11-01, 09:10 | Link #620 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Age: 54
|
The easiest way to distinguish true from fake HD are the small black lines. If the black outlines look consistently sharp and "solid" throughout all frames, the source tends to be true HD. If, on the other hand, the lines look "soft" and a bit "blurry", you usually have an upscaled raw.
|
|
|