3 Replies Latest reply on Oct 12, 2012 8:58 PM by josephs51576386

    Why do my F4V encodes look better than my H.264 encodes?


      Hey everybody,


      This semester I'm going to be publishing a lot of videos for a student run TV station's website. Their current standard is 400kbps, 324x200, VP6 flv with 48kbps stereo mp3 audio. Since it's no longer 2007, I'm making a push to change to a more modern export setting, but I've run into something interesting. I want to get the most I can out of a small file (many episodes are 30 minutes long). I've read that F4V or MP4 should be pretty much the same, and I'd like to use MP4 since it has greater compatibility, but for some reason my F4V encodes look significantly better.


      Still graphic: These are about the same but things get ugly as soon as they move or fade



      When this graphic fades out to black, the MP4 gets blocking artifacts (the color from the red circle spills into the gold letters, the text gets rgb flecks around the inside edges). In the F4V, it looks like a real fade out.



      Fading into video with detail is even worse. This comparison really just speaks for itself. Note her hair, and the handles on the cabinets.



      And again, more blocky font borders:



      This clip doesn't have a lot of movement, and they're more similar. It seems then that movement is the culprit...


      I figured 5 of these PNGs were enough to make this post a huge download, so here's a link to the last comparison I made if you're interested: http://www.qwertycake.com/share/forum_pics/pot.png

      Both encapsulation methods have trouble with the steam, but her hand (moving) is blockier in the MP4.


      My encoding settings were VERY similar. Media Info. Actual Encode Settings.


      What do you think?