FORUMS: list search recent posts

SV3 pro codec for CM3.1

COW Forums : Compression Techniques

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
twistlick
SV3 pro codec for CM3.1
on May 2, 2005 at 3:53:44 am

Anybody know if the Sorenson Video 3 PRO codec I purchased for Cleaner will work in CM3.1 when it comes out? Will it all work in Tiger?


Return to posts index

charles simonson
Re: SV3 pro codec for CM3.1
on May 2, 2005 at 2:06:57 pm

Yes and Yes. And because CM3.1's preprocessing is so great, the output is wonderful using SV3.


Return to posts index

Ben Waggoner
Re: SV3 pro codec for CM3.1
on May 2, 2005 at 11:22:25 pm

The only thing you can't do in CM that you can do in Squeeze is 2-pass VBR.

As Charles suggests, the better preprocessing of CM means you can often get better results in CM 1-pass VBR than in Squeeze 2-pass VBR.


My Book: http://www.benwaggoner.com/books.htm
Squeeze and ProCoder tutorials: http://www.classondemand.net/benwaggoner/
Compression Class at Stanford: http://www.digitalmediaacademy.org/compression.html


Return to posts index


charles simonson
Re: SV3 pro codec for CM3.1
on May 3, 2005 at 2:13:59 pm

That's true. Sorry I didn't clarify about the 1 and 2 pass thing.


Return to posts index

twistlick
A few more questions on CM3.1
on May 3, 2005 at 7:56:01 pm

Thanks for the info.
Some more Questions about CM3.1 and SV3 codec:

1. If you compress the same file with Cleaner and CM3.1 with SV3pro will the final file be close to the same file size or is one more efficient than the other?

2. I assume with 1 pass encoding CM3.1 would be pretty fast compared to Cleaner's 2-pass - is this true? Is it double the speed or more?

3. Is there a way to use the 'Quicktime Effects' (located in the ADJUST tab of Cleaner settings) in CM3.1?


Return to posts index

Ben Waggoner
Re: A few more questions on CM3.1
on May 3, 2005 at 7:59:48 pm

1. File size is data rate * duration, so that won't change. The 2-pass codec can offer a little better quality at the same data rate in theory, but the better preprocessing of CM3.1 might provide a bigger quality boost than that.

2. Yes, roughly twice as fast, since there is only a single pass. Probably better than that yet, since CM3.1 is well optimized for current Macs, and Cleaner hasn't had any optimization in over two years. CM's relative speed advantage is likely to be greater on a G5 than on a G4.

3. No, but you wouldn't want to. The filters Popwire supplies are a lot higher quality.



My Book: http://www.benwaggoner.com/books.htm
Squeeze and ProCoder tutorials: http://www.classondemand.net/benwaggoner/
Compression Class at Stanford: http://www.digitalmediaacademy.org/compression.html


Return to posts index


charles simonson
Re: A few more questions on CM3.1
on May 3, 2005 at 8:55:32 pm

Ben is correct about CM3.1 on a G5. It absolutely screams on a dual G5, giving mac users encoding times comparable to the best PC encoders.


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]