|
|
|
Über Geek
 
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Monday, June 14, 2010 6:03 PM
Posts: 82,
Visits: 388
|
|
| I was cleaning out my links this morning and found this great website that I used to use for my classes. You can find it here: http://codecs.onerivermedia.com/ They put together a fantastic comparison of codecs, compressions types and color depths in a easy to understand visual presentation. Though mostly based on Quicktime based encoding, this website can easily deconstruct the mechanics of the results of encoding into something anyone could understand. Hope this is useful.
Mark Kauffman
Technical Lead / PA
Project Visualization TEC
Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc.
Kauffman@pbworld.com
|
|
|
|
|
Über Geek
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Monday, June 14, 2010 6:03 PM
Posts: 82,
Visits: 388
|
|
I'm really beginning to like the PNG encoded Quicktime format. Let me give you an idea of it's compression relative to a None or Animation compression format. Say you have a 1GB file using the None compression scheme. It's size if you use the Animation codec would be about 500 to 700MB in size whereas the PNG codec would be somewhere in the 200MB range. Naturally this is all dependant on the content, fast changing motion compared to slow or static shots, but the size difference is fantastic. The best thing is that it plays well on a fast machine and is a lossless compression format, perfect for archiving. In fact, I noticed PNG is superfast when used in combustion compared to AVI's.
Mark Kauffman
Technical Lead / PA
Project Visualization TEC
Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc.
Kauffman@pbworld.com
|
|
|
|
