Lagarith Lossless, not HuffYUB

DJ_Izumi · Post by **DJ_Izumi** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:27 am

http://lags.leetcode.net/codec.html

Everyone mostly seems to suggest HuffYUV on the forums but Lagarith is here and it's more efficent.

Lagarith is a fast lossless compression codec like H uffYUV but has a few additional features.

1) Lagarith achives greater compression than HuffYUV.

2) It supports a wide selection of colorspaces, including YV12 so you can convert MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 files to Lagarith while keeping them in their native color space and saving more disk space without any additional loss.

Compare these two files I made using HuffYUV and Lagarith, both in RGB mode. These were made from the same RGB lossless master copy. The file's length is only 2mins 22seconds with a resolition of 856x480:

Noir Raider SE Rerelease Master Copy (Lagarith RGB)(AC3).avi 922 MB (967,581,696 bytes)

Noir Raider SE Rerelease Master Copy (HuffYUV RGB)(AC3).avi 1.35 GB (1,450,600,448 bytes)

RamonesFan2020204 · Post by **RamonesFan2020204** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:59 pm

What's the version that comes with the AMVApp?

Zarxrax · Post by **Zarxrax** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:02 pm

I've been pimping Lagarith for years :\

DJ_Izumi · Post by **DJ_Izumi** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:33 pm

Zarxrax wrote:I've been pimping Lagarith for years :\

HuffYUV still seems to be the standard recommendation on the forums though.

Kariudo · Post by **Kariudo** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 3:33 pm

I think that might be due to some of the better aspects of huffy.
although I don't know how valid it is (the first claim I make right after this), I've heard that huffy is a bit faster than lagartih, and is less system resource intensive.

with all the great programs avaliable for free (or under $100) more people are/can taking up editing. This means that people with lower end machines, or just out of date machines now have the option to edit.

with external hard drives (and internal ones) becoming pretty cheap (lets not forget the standard hard drive size on pre-built machines is also rising), the size difference might not matter as much.

I am in the habbit of suggesting both (and finally d/led lagarith after months of suggesting it)

DJ_Izumi · Post by **DJ_Izumi** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:26 pm

Lagarith may be slightly slower than HuffYUV, it is still 'Fucking fast', Just like HuffYUV is. Both perform well on low end systems. The speed difference is largely irrelevent with just how fast they both are.

HuffYUV losses out in terms of color space support as well.

And finally, for going for larger hard drives, you might as well use that as an argumen for using uncompressed video as well.

Smaller lossless files means you can fit MORE video in the ram to be accessed immediatly and read large files faster from your drives.

Org Profile · Post by **GloryQuestor** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:33 pm

RamonesFan2020204 wrote:What's the version that comes with the AMVApp?

Older than the one on the page, since the AMVApp 2.1 update is from 2005 but the 1.3.8 version (currently on the Lagarith page) is dated 03/12/2006.

I'm going to try out the new version. Hopefully it works better with my editor than the older Lagarith version does.

Qyot27 · Post by **Qyot27** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 11:46 pm

Kariudo wrote:I think that might be due to some of the better aspects of huffy.
although I don't know how valid it is (the first claim I make right after this), I've heard that huffy is a bit faster than lagartih, and is less system resource intensive.

HuffYUV is substantially faster than Lagarith on my machine (this is largely affected by colorspace; RGB-mode HuffYUV flys like a bat out of hell in Premiere, but any mode of Lagarith or YV12-mode HuffYUV is like trying to remove a bullet from a foot inside an elephant's ass with a pair of eyebrow tweezers), although for lossless backups I do use YV12-mode Lagarith - for backups it's an absolute lifesaver, but my hardware is just too old to handle it for editing. Unless drastic speed improvements were made for 1.3.8, I don't see that changing (I'm using 1.3.7 at the moment).

with all the great programs avaliable for free (or under $100) more people are/can taking up editing. This means that people with lower end machines, or just out of date machines now have the option to edit.

They always had the option to edit. Computers from four or five years ago (like mine) are horrendously 'lower end' or out of date compared to today's desktop standards, but it was always possible to edit with them (the companies have been putting out editing software for 'current' computers since the '90s, including MS with Windows Movie Maker - that was first available for Win98, although I don't know exactly when it was introduced - Premiere and Avid date back to the mid or early 90s though, if I'm not mistaken). At one point in time they were blazing fast on the newest modern equipment too, but that would seem unbelievably slow by 2006 standards. People now are just spoiled by having powerful 3+ GHz processors with over a gig of RAM and/or Front Side Bus speed - I'll admit, I would be too if I actually had that kind of computer, but the hardware I'm using right now doesn't prevent me from editing.

Man, I must sound like I'm 80. Hey, you damn kids, get off my lawn!

Coderjo · Post by **Coderjo** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:55 am

Qyot27 wrote:including MS with Windows Movie Maker - that was first available for Win98

WMM was released with Windows Millenium Edition.

BTW, I have had Adobe Premiere since sometime between 1996 and 1998, iirc. And I played around with an old version of premiere on one of the mac at my Junior High school before that. I'm actually still using that copy of premiere I got way back when. Back then, I had a AMD K6 300mhz or so, iirc. also a 9 gig scsi and an 18 gig scsi. wow, was that a lot of disk space back then >_<

Keeper of Hellfire · Post by **Keeper of Hellfire** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 2:06 am

Take a look at EADFAG and you'll know why people prefer the HuffYUV way (beside the speed advantages):

Huffyuv is a tried and tested method and is very reliable.

Reliability is more important than disk space, and the majority of the people tends to stick with proven methods than to switch to new ones. Beside this, I believe to remember one part of a previous EADFAG (the one which I used for learning) warning that Lagarith is under heavy development and future versions may be incompatible with the actual one. Since many other used that version too, they'll probably recommend HuffYUV instead of Lagarith.