On Fri, 2003-02-07 at 13:12, Martin Samuelsson wrote: > On Friday 07 February 2003 21:10, Ronald Bultje wrote: > > Although even high-quality MJPEG has some annoying noise, I don't > > consider this much of a problem, the resulting MPEG never looks bad at > > all here (long live denoising)... MJPEG certainly isn't perfect, but can > > you really see the difference between the end products where the > > intermediate material was MJPEG or DV, respectively? > > > > I can't... > > It would be interesting indeed to run some comparisons between, say, a DC10+ > and that DV thingy. Especially with cable video, and see how well the > one-setting-fits-all-needs really works when you throw actual TV on it.
Interestingly enough,.. I only record TV. Right off the DirectTV satellite receiver (got rid of Digital Cable because the quality was horrible on all but digital channels). > > But, _my_ MJPEG card does, surprisingly, work well enough that I'm not > interested in buying more hardware just to make such a comparison. *shrug* > The next step for me would be either realtime MPEG compression hardware or a > DVB-C (I think cable is C, anyway) card, so I can snarf the MPEG data > directly from the source. I prefer not to capture in realtime to MPEG, because in my experience MPEG makes for a really crummy format to edit well. I couldn't live with commercials on my DVDs. --Aaron ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Mjpeg-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
