[PD] gem & cinepak video on linux

[justin c. rounds]

i agree that cinepak looks terrible, but i feel like i'm stuck using it 
because:

1. the files are relatively small and they decompress quickly, so i can 
play many of them simultaneously

2. i can keyframe every single frame, so i don't get any hiccups 
scrubbing/scratching the video

so what i'm asking is:

given that i want to be able to play back many (at least four) video 
files simultaneously while manipulating their playback speeds and 
directions (like scratching records on turntables), what is the best 
codec to use?

also am i making incorrect assumptions given the capabilities of modern 
hardware? that is, do i really need to keyframe every single frame in 
order to get smooth playback in both directions and at rapidly varying 
speeds? and do i really need to be concerned with having file sizes 
small enough to reside in memory and not streamed from disk?
_
j


chris clepper wrote:
> 
> On Mar 17, 2005, at 2:53 PM, Tim Blechmann wrote:
> 
>> hi all ...
>>
>> i'm currently working with a gem patch to play back videos files encoded
>> with the cinepak format on linux ...
> 
> 
> Why on earth are you doing that?  Cinepak is the very first lossy codec 
> developed for quicktime around 1991 and the quality is horrendous.  It's 
> very unlikely that you would encounter any content compressed after 
> 1996/97 in Cinepak as literally every single codec after it is superior.
> 
>> and what's the prefered (most stable, hq) video codec for linux ...
> 
> 
> Photo-Jpeg?  Uncompressed 4:2:2?  Anything other than Cinepak!
> 
>> thanks .... tim
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
> 
> 

-- 
__________________________
     justin c. rounds
           __
          d..b
          /[]\
           /\
    [/(o)][:+:][/(o)]
http://justincrounds.org/
__________________________