SND2005
Premium
join:2001-09-15
Im Over Here
 ·CWLab
1 edit | reply to bmn
Re: They suck
@Jaded Cynical Centrist Idealist
Hardly, Microsofts codecs for HD content kick the living crap out of anything Quicktime or Real could hope to produce.
If your machine can handle it, check out the following
»www.microsoft.com/windows/window···ase.aspx |
|
komal
join:2003-02-16
| Hardly what? Aren't you just echoing the rest of us? When MS first introduced WMP9 and the codecs, it released this page
»www.microsoft.com/windows/window···lity.asp
for the user to see if their system was powerful enough. |
|
SND2005
Premium
join:2001-09-15
Im Over Here | Read & understand the entire thread before you comment. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to SND2005
said by SND2005  :
Hardly, Microsofts codecs for HD content kick the living crap out of anything Quicktime or Real could hope to produce.
Considering that's only for HD content... Other than that, WMP is a poor format. I know, I've worked with just about all of them for audio and video.
And even then, Quicktime has not released an HD version of the QT codec yet, so you are comparing apples to oranges. When Quicktime's HD codec comes out, it will probably trump WMP.
--
Communism never failed, because it never existed...
Conservatives = enemies of personal freedom || Liberals = enemies of economic freedom |
|
tdkyo
join:2002-12-07
Rochester, NY | Not exactly. Did you put in the factor of compression ratios? WMV can deliver a great video/sound stream in a fraction of quicktime's format. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| The compression ratio for WMP is about all that's in its favor... Artifacting, distortion, etc. happen much more with in than with other codecs, excluding Real. Realplayer's codec is probably the worst I've seen when it comes to problems like artifacting and distortion.
--
Communism never failed, because it never existed...
Conservatives = enemies of personal freedom || Liberals = enemies of economic freedom |
|
komal
join:2003-02-16
| reply to SND2005
said by SND2005 :
Read & understand the entire thread before you comment.
Before you make yourself look foolish, you should clarify what you're responding to. |
|
komal
join:2003-02-16 | reply to bmn
When I need to cut down a movie's size, I use WMP format, I rarely notice a quality drop, and it reduces the size by up to (for me) 42%. |
|
SND2005
Premium
join:2001-09-15
Im Over Here
1 edit |  reply to komal
The only one at risk of looking foolish is you. If you look at the following comments its clear others have understood... |
|
tdkyo
join:2002-12-07
Rochester, NY | reply to bmn
What bandwidth settings have you been using?? If you put 1.5 megabit bandwidth for audio/video streaming when encoding, the quality is very very good! |
|
komal
join:2003-02-16 | Yeah, that's what I use. For some reason the supposedly higher quality settings have lower bitrates. But I use the encoding designed for streaming to 1.5 megabit connections, pretty much the highest quality possible with WMV format. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to tdkyo
said by tdkyo :
What bandwidth settings have you been using?? If you put 1.5 megabit bandwidth for audio/video streaming when encoding, the quality is very very good!
I've worked with several different bandwidth settings. It depends on what was needed and how much bandwidth the server it was going to had...
--
Communism never failed, because it never existed...
Conservatives = enemies of personal freedom || Liberals = enemies of economic freedom |
|
