or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by d-range

Which brings us back to one of the points I made very early on in this topic: for the final ouput quality of a video, only the following variables matter: codec, encoder, bitrate. What you are describing is better encoding (apparently optimized manually, which I find very surprising since encoders have very sophisticated algorithms to optimize encoding, that probably beat a human 9 out of 10 times). Since Apple can encode iTunes content with exactly the same encoder and...
Again this is technically true, but I'm pretty sure Main Profile is the minimum/least advanced profile that Blu-Ray uses. You won't find baseline or streaming profile on a Blu-Ray disc, since it would be pointless with all the storage and decoding hardware a Blu-Ray player has.
I'm aware of that, but the profiles typically used for streaming actually make tradeoffs that result in lower image quality, not improve it. If I remember correctly they use less efficient entropy coding to allow better error correction on lost packets, and there are more constraints on encoder features, bitrates and image sizes etc. All of this to set a reasonable baseline that streaming decoders can adhere to so they don't have to implement every bit of the complete H264...
That's a strawman argument. We're not comparing analog audio cables here, but video encoding quality, and the quality difference between content encoded with the same encoder and codec, but significantly lower bitrate is enormous, and easily quantifiable. I gave a very concrete example that supports this statement, which is that even with my relatively modest AV setup (only 42" with a midrange AV receiver and speakers), I can tell the difference between a Blu-Ray disc and...
The comparison is fair for that particular clip of video, but you still cannot extrapolate that in any meaningful way. Even MPEG II will get you great video quality at modest bitrates if all you watch is slow moving anime or something similar. Throw a fast moving action movie with high dynamic range and lots of video frames with small details at it though, and it absolutely falls apart. Generally speaking, with current state of the art encoders and codecs, the quality...
Minor correction: they didn't switch from AVI to H264, but from DivX/XviD (=MPEG 4) to H264, and dropped the AVI container in favor of MP4 (which confusingly does not have to hold MPEG-4 content). AVI is a container, not a video codec. The reason they dropped it in favor of MP4, is because the latter has wider support by various hardware devices (e.g. the PS3 only groks MP4).Most of the ripped video content you'll find on the internet was H264 in an MP4 or MKV container...
There is nothing 'legally grey' about the H264 codecs you have on Linux. It's an open standard that anyone can implement, it is free for non-commercial use, and it will stay this way until after the patents expire. For commercial use, x264 actually has a licensing program sanctioned by MPEG-LA. If you have an NVidia card, it will even have full H264 decoding built into the drivers on Linux.What you are saying is exactly the kind of FUD that Google used to try and foist an...
You can make the comparison based on nothing else but the technical specifications. Quantifying video quality based on a few stills from a movie is useless, because movies can have wildly differing image characteristics that affect encoding. In the end only 2 things matter: encoder quality and bitrate. Unless Apple invented some kind of uber encoder technology nobody has ever seen before, bitrate is all that matters. If H264 movies I have at 3 times the bitrate of iTunes...
I have to disagree, yhtomitb is right. You don't need some kind of AV freak setup to see/hear the huge difference between Blu-Ray content, or something streamed over the internet, especially not if you want 5.1 or even 7.1 HD audio. A decent-size HDTV (42 inch and upwards, depending on the viewing distance) and a decent AV receiver+surround speakers is enough. I have an HTPC I built myself which I use both for downloaded movies (it's legal where I'm from) and Blu-Ray...
This is a pretty useless comparison. Both Blu-Ray and iTunes content is H264. It's the same codec, and any quality improvement has to be in the encoder. A lower bitrate (=smaller file size) encoding with the same encoder and codec (and codec settings) will always be inferior to a higher bitrate version, period. That said, at the bitrates Apple appears to use for iTunes content, H264 can have a very good image quality, depending on the properties of the video content even...
New Posts  All Forums: