Fernando Cassia wrote:
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Roberto Ragusa <m...@robertoragusa.it
<mailto:m...@robertoragusa.it>> wrote:
Hmmmm? Having an additional intermediate encoding to avoid re-encoding
artifacts???
By converting to very high quality MPEG2 you avoid issues with AVI, XVID, H.264
encoding and decoding which a lot of programs handle differently (you can get
different results just by using different builds of FFMPEG).
I found that the hard way.
For instance, it´s impossible to do frame-accurate cutting with a lot of AVI
cutters, whereas on MPEG2 cuts are frame-perfect. Don´t ask me why, I´m not a
codecs writer just an end user of many video cutting tools. And this is based on
my personal experience.
I have found that writing from avidemux gives many warnings about just this, if
you don't reencode it sometimes crashes.
MPEG2 is the codec used on broadcast HDTV, and while it´s much less efficient
than H.264, it´s less CPU intensive for applications to work with.
I would like to save it in a format which didn't get reencoded for use on a DVD
if I have to distribute the video (lots of meetings and such). Most of the
mastering tools I have tried are no happy to just use what they find. But at
least I have a tool chain which gets my job done, so I am not complaining.
--
Bill Davidsen <david...@tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
