Nothing's wrong at all! Besides, I can't understand why people would prefer a lower resolution and a larger file size.doomer000 wrote:Ya whats wrong with getting good quality sound and video in under 20 MB!!!greenjinjo wrote:Are... you.... serious....?doomer000 wrote:I prefer RM or WMV i hate huge files.
RM makes baby Koop cry
Your Typical Compression
- RamonesFan2020204
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2001 1:18 pm
- DJ_Izumi
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:29 am
- Location: Canada
- Contact:
- Chibi war
- Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 6:19 am
- Location: The almigthy Netherlands.
- RamonesFan2020204
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2001 1:18 pm
- DJ_Izumi
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:29 am
- Location: Canada
- Contact:
- Chibi war
- Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 6:19 am
- Location: The almigthy Netherlands.
Of course they're better, they use dragonballZ and have linkin park, or even better, Naruto~!angelx03 wrote:It's there to spite the people who know what they're doing. Of course it's not like their videos are looking any better.DJ_Izumi wrote:AN AXIS OF STUPID, THREATENS OUR NATIONZ.
- Streicher
- Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 11:48 am
Sorry, but its very possible to get good looking results in that filerange if the song is around 3 minutes.Chibi war wrote:I usually avoid any AMV here that's smaller then 40/50Mb...
I'm sorry that you think a good looking amv needs to be XBOX HUEG. ,_,
I personally hate big sized amvs. There have to be some really good reasons to distribute them in the 70+ MB range. For example very difficult to compress source, lots of very fine text/effects or a very long song. I've seen plenty of amvs where the filesize just wasnt justified at all. For me its a sign of lazyness. ._.
When hunting for amvs, an amv in wmv or an (unjustified) 70+ size must really interest me to get downloaded.
RM will probably never have a chance. There is absolutely no excuse to use that fugly codec.
WMV9 can look very good. But it eats up more resources then a smaller and similar looking h.264 encode.
- DJ_Izumi
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:29 am
- Location: Canada
- Contact:
Since the community will likely gravitate towards h.264 we'll face a problem once (And, patheticly, still occasioanlly) seen with DivX and XviD encodes. People with absolutely no clue how to play them.
Even in 2006 I've occasionally heard "I get sound but there's no video." when someone tries to playback an XviD or DivX video. H.264 in mp4 or MKV is only going to make this situation worse.
What suggestions to people have to combat this? Would an Org Codec Pack be a decent idea or would that likely just conflict with other, already effective packs like the CCCP? Should the org endorse CCCP?
Even in 2006 I've occasionally heard "I get sound but there's no video." when someone tries to playback an XviD or DivX video. H.264 in mp4 or MKV is only going to make this situation worse.
What suggestions to people have to combat this? Would an Org Codec Pack be a decent idea or would that likely just conflict with other, already effective packs like the CCCP? Should the org endorse CCCP?




