Please consider making a donation to help to sustain curefans. Learn more.
Started by japanesebaby, June 23, 2008, 18:39:42
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: MAtT on June 23, 2008, 18:26:18The original - in MPEG-2 - is a lossy codec too, hence the reason they are both of similar size.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mpeg-2 Re-encoding to a different lossy codec is not ideal, since you're right in saying you would simply degrade it further. The usual reason is so that you can edit it, and it looks like the guy did that here. MPEG-2 is a proprietary format and most editors - like VirtualDub - won't deal with it because of infringement (although there is a mod that will).
Quote from: MAtT on June 23, 2008, 18:50:21I understand what you say about AVI, but it's not strictly correct. AVI can't actually be lossy or lossless, only the encoded streams it contains. It's just a container.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVI
Quote from: MAtT on June 23, 2008, 20:08:46I understand and agree with what you're saying, that when you get an AVI file (and AVI files may or may not have .avi extensions) it can be good quality or bad quality compression dependent on the codec used and the bitrate, but I don't know what you mean by "any analog video transfer is actually avi-sourced".