| Re: What is a reasonable file size for AVI XVid F
Question by Heiko Nocon:
April 2009
Carsten Beckermann wrote:
> What is a good size for XVid AVI file duration per hour?
>
> Of course, one can not generalize the issue.
That's right.
> Therefore my concrete example:
>
> If I like 720x576 or 720x400 with the TV card into a
> lossless format, I want to take this huge file then
> makes sense to compress.
It is therefore probably an analogue TV card. Since there
then primarily synonymous depends on how well the signal. The more noise
in the Picture, the higher the bitrate you need to make it without noticeable
Losses to compress.
Therefore s.besten before Compression subtly (!!!) noise. Unfortunately
noise is a very high computation-intensive process.
Not the noise rarely lasts longer than the subsequent
Compression.
A workable compromise is to use the example with VirtualDub
supplied filter and smoother temporal smoother. (For smoother would
it is clearly better alternatives, but the need then halt the synonymous
multiple computing time). For a moderately noisy analog cable signal
is the following filter chain pretty good: First, the temporal
smoother. Setting "3". Then the smoother. Rauschvorfilterung
activate and set to "2".
Encoding with XviD will not. This can unfortunately not qualitätsbasiertes
Encoding (or it is not for lay people without deep knowledge of the
Procedure, adjustable). So prefer DivX, as is the one with
Click selected. As a "quality value" is something between 3
useful and 4 (where lower values result in better quality, but
in return, of course synonymous with larger files).
Another useful measure is in any case, even before the Capture
the noise so as to curtail the black edges that completely
disappear, which is not only somewhat smaller file sizes, but
notably reduced computing synonymous, of course, especially when
"letterboxed" material such as movies.
And finally we should gecroppte Picture resize so that Height and
Width both are multiples of 16. That makes it the filters and
particularly synonymous with the encoder lighter, thus saving computing time again synonymous.
In addition, it improves the compatibility. The fact forced
resulting distortion of aspect ratio are usually so small,
that they remain virtually unnoticeable.
The resulting file size strews but still enormous,
even with material for which is always the same Resolutionergibt. It
depends qualitätsbasiertem halt when encoding of the image content, such as
large the file is. In the middle are used in the above settings to
about 600. .1000 MByte / h quite usable material out.
Answer by Andreas Erber:
Nocon Heiko wrote:
> Knowledge of the proceedings adjustable). So prefer DivX, there is
> With the click of a mouse selected. As a "quality value" is then
> Something between 3 and 4 make sense (where the lower values
> Better quality result, but of course in return for greater synonymous
> Files).
>
DivX not forget to CPUs with more than one logical and / or
real nuclear option, the "increased Multithreading" box.
Best Regards,
| |
