Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> 
> The file happened to be laying around on my HD. It's actually meant to 
> be watched at 22 frames/second - but the MPEG headers say 25, which is 
> why it looks so damned fast.

Nah, I ment that the steps are so big that there's no MPEG-style motion 
blur.

> But I tried freeze-framing it in a few 
> places, and nothing really serious was evident.

Yep, nothing serious, but still visible.

> Certainly this video looks miles better than anything Mencoder has so 
> far managed to produce for me. Every time I try with Mencoder, I get 
> huge blocks of rainbow colours appearing here and there, and sometimes 
> really ugly DCT artifacts as if the file is actually corrupted somehow...

Yep, this does look good, certainly the best MPEG-1 I've ever 
seen...Hey, wait a minute, I just watched it again and found out why it 
looks so good:
Selected video codec: [ffmpeg2] vfm: ffmpeg (FFmpeg MPEG-2)

So I re-checked:
aero@groath ~ $ file ~/Example.mpg
/home/aero/Example.mpg: MPEG sequence, v2, MP@ML progressive Y'CbCr 
4:2:0 video, LD-TV 640P, 30 fps

Seems that the MPEG-header on the file I got says it's MPEG-II with 30fps.

> 
> Well OK, but you have to look pretty damned hard to find them. Certainly 
> compered to the chewed up mess Mencoder gives me, these look flawless!
> 

I even saw them on the first time I watched it - my eyes are getting 
cranky about those :(. I think I'll need to watch overcompressed JPEG's 
and FLV's for few months to get back to reality.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message