|
From: Steven M. S. <sm...@2B...> - 2004-01-02 20:37:01
|
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> Indeed, if you have the time to manage software in such a manner.
If a couple minutes to save hours of encoding time doesn't make it
worth the small amount of time then nothing will.
> MP4 containers huh? I will have to take a look. Do they overcome 2G
> file limitations?
Supposedly but since the most common (that I have seen) use of the
MP4 container (aka Quicktime) is for 320x240 "web movie" sized
images I don't know if the players will have problems with large
files or not.
> > The couple things you'll need are the AAC encoder ("faac" from
> > www.audiocoding.com I believe) and 'mp4creator' (a small part of
>
> Thanx!
Welcome! Uh, mpeg4ip is a big project - useful to have though.
> Yeah, but I am not talking about semantics here. Why is a "STB/DVD"
> player more suited to MPEG2 than a computer? Or are you just reflecting
And neither am I. Current usage differentiates between computer
software playback and a box that sits on top of the TV. Go to any
video forum/mailinglist/whatever - you'll see that STB means standalone
unit and not a computer.
> I use 2500 kbits/sec on full frame (i.e. no cropping, no
If it's clean material that's a bit on the high side. There are
options to ffmpeg/mencoder that will allow the use of a considerably
lower bitrate. Mencoder can do the cropping without a speed penalty
and that would save some bits. I've done some encoding at ~1500
which came out looking more than acceptable for casual viewing.
> 1 full hour is slightly more than 1GB, so anything 2+ hours blows the
> 2GB limitations.
Yep - but most TV shows are well less than that (most movies
too except for the occasional epic length ones). Hmmm, MPlayer
can handle multiple files I believe so that would be another way to
handle the long movies - use 2 files perhaps.
Cheers,
Steven Schultz
|