On 12/25/2012 04:28 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Roberto Ragusa <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > Hmmmm? Having an additional intermediate encoding to avoid re-encoding artifacts??? > > > By converting to very high quality MPEG2 you avoid issues with AVI, XVID, H.264 encoding and decoding which a lot of programs handle differently (you can get different results just by using different builds of FFMPEG). > > For instance, it´s impossible to do frame-accurate cutting with a lot of AVI cutters, whereas on MPEG2 cuts are frame-perfect. Don´t ask me why, I´m not a codecs writer just an end user of many video cutting tools. And this is based on my personal experience. > > MPEG2 is the codec used on broadcast HDTV, and while it´s much less efficient than H.264, it´s less CPU intensive for applications to work with. Ok, so you convert to intermediate MPEG2 to avoid issues with keyframes and cutting which are specific to the formats involved. Then you decide to routinely use MPEG2 for this. And you use high quality settings to minimize unavoidable re-encoding artifacts. What I was objecting is "I go intermediate to avoid artifacts", which can't be true and it looked like you were saying that, originally. -- Roberto Ragusa mail at robertoragusa.it -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
