181–190 of 251 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IDK where you have been for the last decade, but Firefox has not been the better option since Chromium was made Disliking Google Chrome proper is one thing, but Chromium is superior in every way. Rendering, features, speed, memory management
The person is asking for the better option.
I edit videos on a hobbyist level (mostly using davinci resolve to edit clips of me dying in video games to upload to a shareX host to show to friends). The big takeaway for me was reading that for quality/efficiency libx264 is better than nvenc for rendering h264 video. All this time I’ve assumed nvenc is better because it used shiny GPU technology! Is libx264 better for recording high quality videos too? I know it…
The idea that YCbCr is only here because of "legacy reasons", and that we only we discard half of chrominance because of equally "legacy reasons" is bonkers, though.
It seems really weirdly written. It's written with a lot of authority, like saying "Don't use VLC" and "Don't use Y" yet provides no reasoning for those things. Just putting "Trust me, just don't" doesn't suddenly mean I trust the author more, it probably has the opposite effect. Some sections seem to differ based on if the reader knows/doesn't know something, but I thought the article was supposed to be for the latt…
Yeah, as far as I know, to understand video formats, you need to understand encode-decode process, how film/video editor operate normally (keeping in mind film/video editing has levels from $100s to way beyond me), history, how optics and cameras work, etc. Then particular choices and confusions can be understood. This indeed just seems to jump-in in the middle and give a bunch very specific recommendation. I have no…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
VLC has always caused problems for me when seeking backwards (graphical glitches). mpv has never caused any issues in this regard.
VLC and mpv literally use the same underlying codec library. (As well as ffmpeg.)
Seeking is surprisingly difficult. Many container formats don't support it at all, because they don't have indexes, and so it's easy to mess up playback or lose A/V sync by trying it. Constructing the index is about as hard as decoding the entire file too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that?
At least for the real part there was the great 10-bit encoding "switch off" at around 2012 where it seemed like the whole anime encoding scene decided to move into encoding just about everything with "10-bit h264" in order to preserve more detail at the same bitrate. VLC didn't have support for it and for a long time (+5 years?) it remained without proper support for that. Every time you tried playing such files they…
It's nowhere near enough codes, especially in darker regions. That's one reason 10-bit is so important, another is that h264 had unnecessary rounding issues and adding bit depth hid them.
My impression is, their audience equates file size with quality so the bigger the file the more "value" they got from the creator. This is frustrating because bigger files means hitting transfer limits, slower to download, slower to copy, taking more space, etc...
Tangential but, at least for me, I find lots of video creators making 2-3 gig videos for no noticable difference in quality for me re-encoding them to 1/4th the size or less. My impression is, their audience equates file size with quality so the bigger the file the more "value" they got from the creator. This is frustrating because bigger files means hitting transfer limits, slower to download, slower to copy, taking…
My hypothesis is that they use a really high quality value, and that there are diminishing returns there.
The article talks about image comparisons but does not say what the best way to extract an image is. If I want the best possible quality image at a precisely specified time, what would I do? Can I increase quality if I have some leeway regarding the time (to use the closest keyframe)? Is there a way to "undo" motion blur and get a sharp picture?
> Is there a way to "undo" motion blur and get a sharp picture? Not really, no, any more than there is a way to unblur something that was shot out of focus. You can play clever tricks with motion estimation and neural networks but really all you're getting is a prediction of what it might have been like if the data had really been present. Once the information is gone, it's gone.
This is actually possible:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconvolution
If you have a high-quality image (before any compression) with a consistent blur, you can actually remove blur surprisingly well. Not completely perfectly, but often to a surprising degree that defies intuition.
And it's not a prediction -- it's recovering the actual data. Just because it's blurred doesn't mean it's gone -- it's just smeared across pixels, but clever math can be use to recover it. It's used widely in certain types of scientific imaging.
For photographers, it's most useful in removing motion blur from accidentally moving the camera while snapping a photo.