Which format and codec should I use if I want a reasonable good
compression/quality and I want as many as possible to be able to see my
animations, just like that, without having to download a new codec?

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated October 9)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message

It could depend on the type of animation (cartoony or not for instance).
As far as I know Cinepak is a not too obscure AVI- compression method and it
does give you the possibility of setting the compression. The latest Intel codec
was quite good, but I don't know how common that is. 
I don't know much about MPEG, I often find the quality too poor.

Skol!

Remco

Rune wrote:
> 
> Which format and codec should I use if I want a reasonable good
> compression/quality and I want as many as possible to be able to see my
> animations, just like that, without having to download a new codec?
> 
> Rune
> --
> \ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
> / The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
> \ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated October 9)
> / Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message

Rune wrote:
> 
> Which format and codec should I use if I want a reasonable good
> compression/quality and I want as many as possible to be able to see my
> animations, just like that, without having to download a new codec?

	From some modest experimentation NOT EXHAUSTIVE I find MPEG-1 to be
about the size of the sum of the jpeg versions of the frames regardless
of the format created. I tested that by creating mpegs with the original
and the jpeg converted format. While not exhaustive that should address
the compression issue. I can not find any option in mpeg-1 to control
the compression but I make no claim to expertise in it. 

	As to quality my unconfirmed opinion is:  

	The way mpeg-1 creates interpolated frames suffers horribly when there
are screen-wide slight changes. It pixelates them almost. I posted a
couple such results here but not the stills for comparison. S-U-C-K-S
compared to the stills. 

	However where the image changes rather little I would rate the results
outstanding. 

-- 
The only thing Israelies understand is violence. 
	-- The Iron Webmaster, 335

Post a reply to this message

Try Quicktime because then you're able to reach PC and Mac users.

Rob.

Rune schreef:

> Which format and codec should I use if I want a reasonable good
> compression/quality and I want as many as possible to be able to see my
> animations, just like that, without having to download a new codec?
>
> Rune
> --
> \ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
> / The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
> \ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated October 9)
> / Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message

Rob Verweij wrote:
> 
> Try Quicktime because then you're able to reach PC and Mac users.

Yuck! ;)

But seriously, Quicktime suffers from the same problems as other formats: the
versions. On top of that: I had to download the latest Quicktime player to view
a certain fragment and it did some less friendly things to my setup (suddenly
it's a plugin in Netscape for formats I had no problem with, to name an
example).

Remco

> 
> Rob.
> 
> Rune schreef:
> 
> > Which format and codec should I use if I want a reasonable good
> > compression/quality and I want as many as possible to be able to see my
> > animations, just like that, without having to download a new codec?
> >
> > Rune
> > --
> > \ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
> > / The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
> > \ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated October 9)
> > / Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message

Matt Giwer wrote in message <3A330F72.D4A53D34@ij.net>...
>Rune wrote:
>>
>> Which format and codec should I use if I want a reasonable good
>> compression/quality and I want as many as possible to be able to see my
>> animations, just like that, without having to download a new codec?
>
> From some modest experimentation NOT EXHAUSTIVE I find MPEG-1 to be
>about the size of the sum of the jpeg versions of the frames regardless
>of the format created. I tested that by creating mpegs with the original
>and the jpeg converted format. While not exhaustive that should address
>the compression issue. I can not find any option in mpeg-1 to control
>the compression but I make no claim to expertise in it.


From my rather exhaustive experiments, I have found that you can get a very
wide range of sizes for your output file.  I've gotten compression ranges
between 20:1 and 500:1 with different settings for the same animation.
Quality is in direct proportion to the compression ratio.

I recommend using the Berkley MPEG encoder.  It takes a bit of work to use,
but gives you the most control over the output.
--
Mark

"The derivative of sin(2x) is cos(2x)"  - Matt Giwer
"I never said that" - Matt Giwer
"I completely agree a flywheel can store a million times more energy if its
rotational velocity is measured in microradians instead of radians." - Matt
Giwer

Post a reply to this message

To reach a wide audience, use MPG-1.
To get good compression, get a high-tech MPG encoder.

MainActor cost me I think $89US and makes MPG-1 as well as some higher
codecs if you want.
http://www.mainconcept.com/

Good side: It allows you to prescribe the exact number of kb/sec you want
in the final anim.
Bad side: It forces you to prescribe the exact number of kb/sec you want in
the final anim.

Thus with experimentation you can set it up to get just enough kb to get a
pretty video.

Rune wrote:

> Which format and codec should I use if I want a reasonable good
> compression/quality and I want as many as possible to be able to see my
> animations, just like that, without having to download a new codec?

Post a reply to this message

Mark Wagner wrote:
> 
> Matt Giwer wrote in message <3A330F72.D4A53D34@ij.net>...
> >Rune wrote:
> >>
> >> Which format and codec should I use if I want a reasonable good
> >> compression/quality and I want as many as possible to be able to see my
> >> animations, just like that, without having to download a new codec?
> >
> > From some modest experimentation NOT EXHAUSTIVE I find MPEG-1 to be
> >about the size of the sum of the jpeg versions of the frames regardless
> >of the format created. I tested that by creating mpegs with the original
> >and the jpeg converted format. While not exhaustive that should address
> >the compression issue. I can not find any option in mpeg-1 to control
> >the compression but I make no claim to expertise in it.

> From my rather exhaustive experiments, I have found that you can get a very
> wide range of sizes for your output file.  I've gotten compression ranges
> between 20:1 and 500:1 with different settings for the same animation.
> Quality is in direct proportion to the compression ratio.

> I recommend using the Berkley MPEG encoder.  It takes a bit of work to use,
> but gives you the most control over the output.

	To take it one step further, jpeg compression varies by the variations
in the scene. If you do an animation with one little thing moving around
you get great compression. The more of the scene that is changing from
frame to frame the compression is much less. 

	It is clearly not a one dimensional problem. 

--
The difference between chads and chaos is od. 

-- 
If it is digital it is mine. 
If it is on magnetic media it is mine. 
In fact, oddly, if I pay for it is it mine. 
	-- The Iron Webmaster, 349

Post a reply to this message

> But seriously, Quicktime suffers from the same problems as other formats: the
> versions. On top of that: I had to download the latest Quicktime player to view
> a certain fragment and it did some less friendly things to my setup (suddenly
> it's a plugin in Netscape for formats I had no problem with, to name an
> example).

It isn't available in Linux and is a closed source, which we should all
boycott...
I love Macintosh, but I hate closed source...  My opinion

-- 
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Simon Lemieux           | Website : http://www.666Mhz.net  |
| Email : Sin### [at] 666Mhznet | POV-Ray, OpenGL, C++ and more... |
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+

Post a reply to this message

Try Berkley's MPEG encoder

It costs Nothing and has the same good and bad sizes as this commercial one... 

> To reach a wide audience, use MPG-1.
> To get good compression, get a high-tech MPG encoder.
> 
> MainActor cost me I think $89US and makes MPG-1 as well as some higher
> codecs if you want.
> http://www.mainconcept.com/
> 
> Bad side: It forces you to prescribe the exact number of kb/sec you want in
> the final anim.
> 
> Thus with experimentation you can set it up to get just enough kb to get a
> pretty video.

-- 
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Simon Lemieux           | Website : http://www.666Mhz.net  |
| Email : Sin### [at] 666Mhznet | POV-Ray, OpenGL, C++ and more... |
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+

Post a reply to this message