On Tue, 2003-02-11 at 04:29, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> 25Mb/s DV data takes a rather enormous amount of cpu power to play
> back - pretty much takes up a while ~2GHz P4 (friend of mine has a
> 1.7GHz and it can't quite keep up).
Hmm... kino was (at one point anyway), playing bac
Hi -
> From: Robert Kesterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> If you're recording off digital satellite, you'll see block noise in the
> original broadcast signal if you look for it. I never used to notice it,
> but since I started doing my own encodes and trying to get everything
> perfect, I notice it
On 10 Feb 2003, Aaron Newsome wrote:
>
> I do have trouble telling the difference between DV->MPEG2 and broadcast
> though. When I say it looks as good as the original signal, I'm not
> kidding. Of course if you watch long enough you will eventually see some
> MPEG cruft that will give it away as b
Hi!
> From: Aaron Newsome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Welcome back after 1 1/2 weeks ;)
> I rarely watch the actual DV files, other than the time it takes to edit
> the video in Kino. Most all the time I watch the recorded stuff on my 42
25Mb/s DV data takes a rather enormous amount of
On Fri, 2003-02-07 at 12:10, Ronald Bultje wrote:
> Hey Aaron,
>
> On Fri, 2003-02-07 at 19:56, Aaron Newsome wrote:
> > Well the DV files might be bigger than MJPEG but the quality is no
> > comparison in my mind. The DV files are of MUCH higher quality than the
> > MJPEG files even at high MJPEG
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
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 differe
Hey Aaron,
On Fri, 2003-02-07 at 19:56, Aaron Newsome wrote:
> Well the DV files might be bigger than MJPEG but the quality is no
> comparison in my mind. The DV files are of MUCH higher quality than the
> MJPEG files even at high MJPEG quality settings.
Although even high-quality MJPEG has some
On Fri, 2003-02-07 at 05:28, John Ribera wrote:
> The ONLY advantage of a lml33 or DC10+ is the MJPEG files are smaller than
> DV, but with prices of disks comming down that becomes less of a issue.
Well the DV files might be bigger than MJPEG but the quality is no
comparison in my mind. The DV fi
y that money to one of
these units. Anyone want a lml33 for 1/2 price?
- Original Message -
From: "Steven Boswell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Aaron Newsome" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 7:32 PM
Subject:
>>I'm planning to upgrade to either an LML-33 or a Canopus ADVC-100.
>>[...]
>>Does anyone here have experience with both styles of video capturing?
>
>I have used both LML33 and Canopus ADVC-100. If this is indication of
>what I thought of it, I sent my LML33 back to Linux Media Labs.
Wow! That
On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 12:16, Steven Boswell wrote:
> Finally, I have a question about encoding hardwareright now I have a
> Pinnacle PCTV, which is basically just a Bt878 with an S-Video input.
> Now that I'm doing more DVDs, I'm planning to upgrade to either an
> LML-33 or a Canopus ADVC-100.
12 matches
Mail list logo
