SCOUG-HELP Mailing List Archives

<< Previous Message << >> Next Message >>

Date:	Mon, 28 Jun 2004 11:11:35 PDT7
From:	Peter Skye <pskye@peterskye.com >
Reply-To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
Subject:	SCOUG-Help: Supposed OS/2 Port of FFMPEG (?)

Content Type: text/plain

=====================================================
If you are responding to someone asking for help who
may not be a member of this list, be sure to use the
REPLY TO ALL feature of your email program.
=====================================================

J. R. Fox wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
> You mentioned this in your rough draft of that piece for the
> newsletter.

Yes, Jerry Rash was my source.

> I have found various links on a number of websites both
> domestic and foreign. A few point to Hobbes, which I am now
> reasonably sure does NOT have it.

Ah, well, apparently the uploader didn't give his name so the Hobbes
administrator zapped it. It was uploaded to Hobbes on May 24 (I have
the upload template which shows the missing uploader name).

But the upload template does give a cross-reference for the program:

http://ffmpeg.sourceforge.net/

and the Download link there can give you a .tar.gz which all you have to
do is run through your compiler.

> The other links go *nowhere* -- not even to a 404
> error. Perhaps this means the item is too new, or
> that it was withdrawn for some reason.

See the SourceForge link above. The 0.4.8 release is there and the CVS
tree shows a newer one.

> The thing that confuses me is that WV supposedly drew heavily upon the
> FFMPEG project in its development history, going back a couple years
> or more. If so, it may not have anything to offer that is not already
> available in WV.

The latest FFMPEG in the CVS is dated today (28Jun2004).

> For anyone seeking to attempt conversions between different video file
> formats, I am still looking for any evidence that such options exist
> on *our* platform, even in the form of an early beta.

There's a potential double-whammy on the quality of conversions. If the
source and target files both use lossy compression then the converted
file will have poorer quality. And if the conversion also changes the
XY resolution then the converted file will have poorer quality *unless*
both the X and Y are exact integer multiples of the source file.

By the way, 8x8 cosine transform compression (jpeg/mpeg and others) is
not lossy per se. But to make the compressed file smaller you have to
throw away some of the higher cosine harmonics which results in a loss
of quality. How much you throw away is up to you (or the guy who wrote
the compression program you're using).

As long as I'm yacking, that fantastic surfing video image you played at
the SCOUG meeting was, iirc, shot as HD video which has a horizontal
resolution of approximately 2K. An HD direct compression is always
"cleaner" than a 35mm (or 16mm) film transfer which is then compressed.

- Peter

=====================================================

To unsubscribe from this list, send an email message
to "steward@scoug.com". In the body of the message,
put the command "unsubscribe scoug-help".

For problems, contact the list owner at
"rollin@scoug.com".

=====================================================

Return to [ 28 | June | 2004 ]

SCOUG, Warp Expo West, and Warpfest are trademarks of the Southern California OS/2 User Group. OS/2, Workplace Shell, and IBM are registered trademarks of International Business Machines Corporation. All other trademarks remain the property of their respective owners.