Prev: Restoring startup disk from Time Machine
Next: Erik Richard Sørensen - OOo 3.2.1?
From: gtr on 22 May 2010 14:56
I have a home video which I output in all the format options available
via Quicktime.

The Cellular option is horrid, turns a 430mb file into a 328k 3gp file.

But among the many other options, are a computer m4v (9.2mb), ipod m4v
(6mb), and an iphone m4v (3.8mb).

The only substantive difference I can find in looking at these via qt
inspector is that they have different "data rates". What does this
mean and how much visual "quality" do I lose in the process? Just
eye-balling these three files in full screen, I'm having a hard time
distinguishing them relative to resolution issues.

From: gtr on 23 May 2010 14:29
On 2010-05-23 05:10:44 -0700, Warren Oates said:

> IThe only substantive difference I can find in looking at these via qt
> inspector is that they have different "data rates". What does this
> mean and how much visual "quality" do I lose in the process? Just
> eye-balling these three files in full screen, I'm having a hard time
> distinguishing them relative to resolution issues.
>
> It's all a trade-off: quality vs file size (and thus download time or
> streaming efficiency) and vs how big you can make it on web page and
> still look "crisp." The higher the bitrate, the better quality you'll
> get, but the bigger the file will be. QT Pro's "Export for Web" is
> quite useful for producing good quality website .h264 (what they call
> "desktop") once you throw away the extra fluff it creates. I just wish
> I could get at the settings.
>
> I know this is based on the hated Flash, but the concepts are the same,
> and .h264 is included:
>
> http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flash/apps/flv_bitrate_calculator/
>
> Here's another:
>
> http://web.forret.com/tools/video_fps.asp

Excellent stuff; thanks, Warren.

Actually when I said I was doing it via Quicktime, I thought I was
actually using Quicktime Pro 7. I see know that I was actually using
QT regulah after all.

Speaking of which, is Quicktime Pro 7 a subset of the current player.
If I use QTP7 alone, am I losing some functionality?

From: Malcolm on 23 May 2010 18:08
On 2010-05-23 14:29:07 -0400, gtr said:
> Speaking of which, is Quicktime Pro 7 a subset of the current player.
It's the other way round.

> If I use QTP7 alone, am I losing some functionality?
QuickTime Player 7 has a lot of features that are not yet in the new
QuickTime Player.

From: Phillip Jones on 23 May 2010 22:07
Malcolm wrote:
> On 2010-05-23 14:29:07 -0400, gtr said:
>> Speaking of which, is Quicktime Pro 7 a subset of the current player.
> It's the other way round.
>
>> If I use QTP7 alone, am I losing some functionality?
> QuickTime Player 7 has a lot of features that are not yet in the new
> QuickTime Player.
>
That why it recommend if possible to retain QT 7.x yes it can be used
with Snow Leopard

--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net mailto:pjones1(a)kimbanet.com
From: gtr on 24 May 2010 13:04
On 2010-05-23 15:08:00 -0700, Malcolm said:

> On 2010-05-23 14:29:07 -0400, gtr said:
>> Speaking of which, is Quicktime Pro 7 a subset of the current player.
> It's the other way round.

But the QTP7 is using the same engine, particularly in regard to export
options found in both programs?

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Restoring startup disk from Time Machine
Next: Erik Richard Sørensen - OOo 3.2.1?