Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> scott wrote:
>>> Anyway, there are also compression algorithms that are a lot more 
>>> efficient than the one used on DVDs. So in theory you could get DVD 
>>> quality with a lot less than 9 MBit/s if you use a better compression 
>>> algorithm.
> 
>> Indeed. A 10:1 improvement in compression is easily attainable without 
>> noticable loss compared to DVD compression anyway.
> 
>   10 times smaller than MPEG-2 with the same visual quality? Now that,
> I think, would be quite hard.

Hmm. Rethinking, 6:1 or so. Basically, you can fit a DVD onto a CD without 
really comprimising the signal.  And remember that when they make DVDs, they 
don't necessarily squeeze it as small as possible. They squeeze it as much 
as necessary to make it fit on the disk, even if they could compress it more.

I misthought. It's more like 6:1. I was confusing Blu->DVD instead of 
DVD->CD or something.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
   open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.

Post a reply to this message