 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I am not sure what happened: I posted this on January 13th, saw it there for
a couple of days, but it seems to have disappeared...
Hopefully most of the errors in the program have been removed. It can be
found at http://stols.net .
I would appreciate any (+ or -) comments, preferably by e-mail, so I'll know
whether it's worth while to upload newer versions when ready.
--
Regards,
Sander
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: omniVERSE
Subject: Re: CMPEG Windows (95/NT) Frontend trial version
Date: 18 Jan 2000 01:54:19
Message: <38840e1b@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Used this latest incarnation for the first time just now. It's fantastic! I
wouldn't have dreamt I'd ever use CMpeg anywhere but in a DOS box.
You are to be congratulated and I thankyou very much. I better stop here before
I start building a statue in your honor that I can't possibly finish.
Bob
"Sander" <san### [at] stols com> wrote in message news:38822cd2@news.povray.org...
> I am not sure what happened: I posted this on January 13th, saw it there for
> a couple of days, but it seems to have disappeared...
>
> Hopefully most of the errors in the program have been removed. It can be
> found at http://stols.net .
>
> I would appreciate any (+ or -) comments, preferably by e-mail, so I'll know
> whether it's worth while to upload newer versions when ready.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Sander
>
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: omniVERSE
Subject: Re: CMPEG Windows (95/NT) Frontend trial version
Date: 18 Jan 2000 08:37:13
Message: <38846c89@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thought I would bring this up just in case someone hasn't used Cmpeg before or
doesn't realize the consequence of using it with a couple of the options allowed
for in this nifty "frontend". The Manhattan cost function and Logarithmic
block-matching seems the way to go rather than the other two options, Euclidian
and Full-search. I know it says in the Cmpeg.doc (hey, a button added to get to
the Doc maybe?) that they could make for a slightly smaller file (1% to 2%) but
the encoding time is tremendously longer and I can't see a difference enough to
warrant the long wait. I don't use the textual output either. Doesn't mean
there's no sense in having the choice, just thought I'd mention it.
Oh, and I've already got a potential feature wish: inter.mat and intra.mat
choices, and possibly editing of them as well as editing of the control files.
And while I'm at it, I should say that if the Xing encoding (i.ctl) is to be
used you will need the -x switch in there too.
Sheesh! I never thought I'd be back saying another word and yet here I am. It
was great while it lasted... and it still is for that matter.
Bob
"Sander" <san### [at] stolscom> wrote in message news:38822cd2@news.povray.org...
>
> Hopefully most of the errors in the program have been removed. It can be
> found at http://stols.net .
>
> I would appreciate any (+ or -) comments, preferably by e-mail, so I'll know
> whether it's worth while to upload newer versions when ready.
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
