Hi. I am preparing video to be encoded for full-screen broadcast stock footage purposes and see that the big stock footage libraries like Getty are using photo-jpeg, while many smaller ones are using sorenson vid 3. Now H.264 is being hailed as the highest quality compressed video.
Does anyone have any suggestions as to which is really the highest quality to size ratio? Seems like photo-jpeg might be the best answer since the big guys are deeply tied up in it for now.
Also, is there any difference in quality when exporting/encoding directly from Media100xr v.7.5.1 versus exporting to Cleaner 6?
I wouldn't worry about encoding to AVC just yet. While its quality:size ratio is phenomenal, it is not a good editing codec, and it takes a lot of time to encode. With Photo-JPEG, you are compressing a lot less, and thus end up with a much larger filesize, but this is generally more preferable to users of the stock video market. And, if you encoded directly to Photo-JPEG from a Media 100, there wouldn't be much of an advantage to using Cleaner, besides some filter controls.
Thanks for the info Charles. That's what I figured, but just had to confirm it and see if there is anything better out there that I haven't read about.
As far as the Photo-JPEG encoding direct from Media 100 instead of going to Cleaner, how do I know if I have the latest encoding codec? Is this a Quicktime deal or Media 100? If I have the latest Quicktime, then I have the latest codec?
Bear in mind that Photo-JPEG is great for progressive scan content, but doesn't have native support for fields. Motion JPEG is what you want for interlaced video. And if you have rendered RGB graphics, PNG is often smaller than either JPEG codecs, and is always lossless.