Quoted for truth.Castor Troy wrote:Most Hollywood editors don't even know what codecs are.
Lossless codecs for REAL editors
-
Niotex
- The Phantom Canine
- Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2003 1:54 pm
- Status: Simply Insane
- Location: Netherlands
Re: Lossless codecs for REAL editors
-
Kawatta-kun
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:19 pm
- Status: Awesomely great
- Location: Povoa de Santa Iria, Lisbon
- Contact:
Re: Lossless codecs for REAL editors
Allright i'll talk about it to my teachers ^^ loveeed all respondes :'DD
Well the proxy thingy is something much talked about, it helps a lot they say and i believe. Just gotta be carefull.
Well the proxy thingy is something much talked about, it helps a lot they say and i believe. Just gotta be carefull.
-
McDirty
- Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:44 am
- Location: Hollywood, CA
- Contact:
Re: Lossless codecs for REAL editors
Yep. Not only that, but a lot of times they'll discard your lossless codec suggestions as "pfffsssssh! 3rd Party codecs!? We're professionals here, we don't need 3rd party suggestions."Niotex wrote:Quoted for truth.Castor Troy wrote:Most Hollywood editors don't even know what codecs are.
-
Qyot27
- Surreptitious fluffy bunny
- Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 12:08 pm
- Status: Creepin' between the bullfrogs
- Location: St. Pete, FL
- Contact:
Re: Lossless codecs for REAL editors
FFV1 also works due to ffdshow. For Mac users, FFV1 is supported by Perian (as of v1.2.2, from April 13, 2011). There's also several other lossless (and lossy, for that matter) formats Perian can potentially support, but they haven't been exposed to the end user for various reasons like stability.
For instance, if I could manage to successfully compile Perian from source, Lagarith might also be an option - at least hypothetically*; I don't know if there were more things to adjust to make it work than what I did change, and since it failed to build in general it's not like I was able to test it.
*Not that the underlying decoder is iffy on it, just the 'expose it to the end user' part. The version of ffmpeg that ships with Perian is capable of decoding Lagarith, with some caveats (namely, it only supports YV12).
For instance, if I could manage to successfully compile Perian from source, Lagarith might also be an option - at least hypothetically*; I don't know if there were more things to adjust to make it work than what I did change, and since it failed to build in general it's not like I was able to test it.
*Not that the underlying decoder is iffy on it, just the 'expose it to the end user' part. The version of ffmpeg that ships with Perian is capable of decoding Lagarith, with some caveats (namely, it only supports YV12).
My profile on MyAnimeList | Quasistatic Regret: yeah, yeah, I finally got a blog
-
Magnus
- Treasure this time
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:40 pm
- Status: Extremely Handsome
- Location: Sweden
Re: Lossless codecs for REAL editors
+1Niotex wrote:Quoted for truth.Castor Troy wrote:Most Hollywood editors don't even know what codecs are.
-
OtakuGray
- I understoop!
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:12 pm
- Status: Neither here nor there
- Location: Helena, MT
Re: Lossless codecs for REAL editors
Definitely agreed.ZetZu wrote:+1Niotex wrote:Quoted for truth.Castor Troy wrote:Most Hollywood editors don't even know what codecs are.
godix wrote:Like this one amv. It was all like woosh, zoom with effects. And I was all like whoa awesome. Then that guitar thingies popped up and went dun dun DUN dun then those box thingies went zooming by and twirling around and shit. Oh god, then the hexagons popped up and I was like 'I just got a stiffie'. Then there was the circle with those thingies going around and I blew my load.
-
Otohiko
- Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 8:32 pm
Re: Lossless codecs for REAL editors
Yeah I also totally agree.OtakuGray wrote:Definitely agreed.ZetZu wrote:+1Niotex wrote: Quoted for truth.
The Birds are using humanity in order to throw something terrifying at this green pig. And then what happens to us all later, that’s simply not important to them…
-
lloyd9988
- Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 4:57 pm
- Location: AZ
Re: Lossless codecs for REAL editors
Maybe I'm at a loss too as to what codecs are as well. Could someone give me a brief explanation??
-
Fall_Child42
- has a rock
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 6:32 pm
- Status: Veloci-tossin' to the max!
- Location: Jurassic Park
Re: Lossless codecs for REAL editors
I agree as well.Otohiko wrote:Yeah I also totally agree.ZetZu wrote:Definitely agreed.Niotex wrote: Quoted for truth.
Board wrote:You may embed only 3 quotes within each other.
-
Kariudo
- Twilight prince
- Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:08 pm
- Status: 1924 bots banned and counting!
- Location: Los taquitos unidos
- Contact:
Re: Lossless codecs for REAL editors
Codec = COmpressor/DECompressorlloyd9988 wrote:Maybe I'm at a loss too as to what codecs are as well. Could someone give me a brief explanation??
Video can be represented as a sequence of red, green and blue values (there's other ways besides RGB, but this gets my point across just fine.) If you just leave the data like that (uncompressed), a single episode would take roughly 33.4GB of space (720x480*** pixels x 3 bytes per pixel x 24 frames per second x 60 seconds/minute x 24 minutes).
Codecs compress that information down to a more manageable size by using different techniques, and then decompress the data when you try to watch the video.
This is a gross simplification, but...
Lossy codecs throw away some parts of the video information to make files smaller.
Lossless codecs preserve 100% of the information, and have zero quality loss, but make larger files than their lossy counterparts.
***I don't care about the active region here, the point is uncompressed = big
