3 Replies Latest reply on Aug 4, 2009 11:16 AM by the_wine_snob

    sorting out video codecs

    commalot

      I've never bothered to understand all these video codecs available in drop down menus. There's a bunch. I found an article at Wiki that goes into it in great detail. Apparently, many of them are just brand name versions of the same codec. Thus far, I've narrowed down my choices to:

      1. PP's H.264 for Web. (the bit rate is very adjustable)

      2. CineForm AVI for playing on computer. (larger files but looks great)

      3. Mpeg2, of course, for DVD/Blu-Ray.

       

      Are there better choices?

        • 1. Re: sorting out video codecs
          the_wine_snob Level 9
          2. CineForm AVI for playing on computer. (larger files but looks great)

           

          I assume that you do mean CineForm and not Cinepak (by Radius). The one limitation with the AVI will be the lack of X-platform support on the Mac, should any clients be on that platform. In that case, you might want to consider going the .MOV route with the Animation CODEC. Both platforms seem to also handle MPEG-2 pretty well. WMV would likely work only on the PC, regardless of which "flavor" you use.

           

          Some have had better luck with the MainConcept H.264, than with the Apple version. Have not tried them both, so I cannot comment directly.

           

          Yes, CODEC's are a bit of alchemy, and some of it/them go back to the dark ages.

           

          Good luck,

           

          Hunt

          1 person found this helpful
          • 2. Re: sorting out video codecs
            commalot Level 1

            Yes, CineForm would be a problem for cross-platform and networking, however, this is just a hobby. None of that to contend with. I really like the CineForm avi files. They're gorgeous on my computer and play well on my Dual Core.

            • 3. Re: sorting out video codecs
              the_wine_snob Level 9

              Without the X-platform aspect, then you should be good to go. There are other useful formats/CODEC's, but if these are working fine on your system and you are pleased with the results, I'd not change, unless there was a compelling reason to do so.

               

              You'll probably get a few good suggestions for others, and you'll want to experiment to see if they are better for you, but other than that, I can't see a reason to change.

               

              Good luck,

               

              Hunt