[PD] [Gem] pix-native?
doktorp at mac.com
Mon Jul 30 15:54:11 CEST 2007
Most VJs use something very lightly compressed, and use a spatial
only compressor, non temporal codec (some call these editing vs
delivery codecs or intra vs interframe encoding). This makes it
easier to seek to a frame (scratching and jumping around, etc)
More than likely you will be fine with photojpeg (for progressive)
and motion jpeg-b (for interlaced footage) at around 75% quality.
Compressions is a tradeoff with bandwidth and cpu time spent decoding.
Uncompressed 1080i is around 170/sec. Uncompressed Standard Def NTSC
around 27MB/s (not including audio streams)
Compare to HDV and DV which is 3.6MB/sec more here : http://
Jpeg codecs live in the middle of that realm, depending on your
quality setting, framesize and frames per second.
If you can sustain the datarates for the number of streams you want
the uncompressed will always win with ease of CPU decoding, at the
expense of being NASTILY hard on your drives.
In other words, Chris was saying, there is no universal answer and
you will have to do some testing.
On Jul 29, 2007, at 11:36 PM, yonsei wrote:
> I see.
> I am running powerbook G4 1.67 with OS 10.4.10
> thank you
> On Jul 30, 2007, at 2:03 AM, chris clepper wrote:
>> The answer depends a lot on your OS and hardware.
>> On 7/29/07, yonsei <gottlieb at yonsei.ac.kr> wrote:
>> Is there a 'native' container or codec for [pix_film], in terms of
>> minimizing cpu load in rendering to gemwin?
>> I guess qt mov would be the preferred container, but is there
>> anything better? What about codecs? I have gotten about 33% less
>> load (than photojpeg) by using uncompressed qt, but is there
>> anything better?
>> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/
v a d e //
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list