Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Hybrid Still/Movie/MP3 Digicams

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 29, 2007, 10:03 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
adric22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 359
Default

Quote:
I don't know of a *free* I-Frame intermediate codec that preserves quality of the original as Cineform does.
Actually, I use Huffyuv, which is free and does exactly that. However, it is a lossless codec so it does take up a bit of space, but not as much as raw video. However, other options include MotionJPEG (true. I can't think of a free version) or you can use something like XVID and go into the preferences and tell it to make only I-frames.
adric22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 30, 2007, 12:20 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,153
Default

I'm aware of those, but I suppose I didn't really consider Huffyuv to be in the same league as Cineform.

Whenever I've visited Ben Rudiak-Gould's Huffyuv page, I've noted that he doesn't seem to say much about using his codec for high definition.

Instead, he basically talks about it being a better option than MJPEG, which hasn't really been used anyway for several years.

On the other hand, I haven't tried Huffyuv.

So maybe it works well enough for HD.

Have you tried it with 720p or 1080i clips?

Private Idaho
Private Idaho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 30, 2007, 10:43 AM   #13
Junior Member
 
ShawnGBR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3
Default

Just want to say: no problems with my Mac!

I have a 2GHz Core Duo iMac with a Gig of 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM, running the not-quite-latest version of OS X (10.4.11). Seeing as the video codec used by the A-HD is native to Quicktime, editing and playing videos is a breeze.

I was wondering: maybe it might not be the processor. After all, handling video is hungry on memory. Maybe you just need more RAM. I've had situations with old computers where just upping the amount or RAM made all the difference. My last computer had 256MB, I upped it to 768MB (just half a Gig's worth) and games loaded faster, art programs saved my work quicker and macros in the programs took far less time to finish, etc.
ShawnGBR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 30, 2007, 11:41 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
adric22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 359
Default

Private Idaho wrote:
Quote:
Have you tried it with 720p or 1080i clips?
No.. I just use it with 480p and 480i stuff. I have never owned any camera equiment that could take video at anything higher.
Quote:
I was wondering: maybe it might not be the processor. After all, handling video is hungry on memory. Maybe you just need more RAM.
I seriously doubt that is the problem either. I have 512MB and I keep my computer "very clean" in terms of the software loading (or malware, for that matter) so typically I have over 256MB free physical RAM at any time, even when playing the videos (I've checked)

However, I have considered the possibility that my video-card may be inadequete. It is just a built-in Intel 845chipset which is a bit under-powered. I'm not sure how much a video card's 2D accelleration will actually effect playing of MPEG4 videos, though.
adric22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 30, 2007, 1:26 PM   #15
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,623
Default

I just bought 1 gig more memory. I am runng a 2.6 ghz pent 4 Xp sp1 not 2 too many re-formats LOL

my magix now shows the transitionswas missing a some memory to play powerful .mov files and run the program of the HD in full install.

The .MOV of Aiptek runs and skips a beat on the sd card, it also does the same on the HD.

now I am double the info on my newSanyo xacti. it acts the same but when I use Total media it De-interlaces and that helps out fora smooth video

I cannot upgrade 4 meg of video on my caption card, but I can run more memory then needed




fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 30, 2007, 7:29 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,153
Default

I have both a Mac and PC (XP).

As far as I'm concerned, the PC was a waste of money.

Oh, it runs.

But the ease of use and the things that aren't included actually make the cheap PC more expensive -- in the end -- than my $599 Mac mini, which performs astonishingly well.

For me, there's just no comparison between OS X Leopard and Windows XP.

Still use the XP computer from time to time, but it will be my last Windows computer.

I formerly made fun of Macs, but -- with the improvements made to the Mac during the past couple of years -- I think it has pulled way ahead of the PC.

Private Idaho

ShawnGBR wrote:
Quote:
Just want to say: no problems with my Mac!

I have a 2GHz Core Duo iMac with a Gig of 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM, running the not-quite-latest version of OS X (10.4.11). Seeing as the video codec used by the A-HD is native to Quicktime, editing and playing videos is a breeze.

I was wondering: maybe it might not be the processor. After all, handling video is hungry on memory. Maybe you just need more RAM. I've had situations with old computers where just upping the amount or RAM made all the difference. My last computer had 256MB, I upped it to 768MB (just half a Gig's worth) and games loaded faster, art programs saved my work quicker and macros in the programs took far less time to finish, etc.
Private Idaho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 30, 2007, 8:07 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 116
Default

I have both a mac and pc at work (I support pcs not macs) and have to agree to a certain extent that macs are easier to use as well as intergrated and come with the basic software. But the extra cost of the mac can be counter acted with free or purchased software on the pc to bring it into line with a macs cost. Lest we not forget as soon as microsoft adds some extra application(s) then someone somewhwere cries they are using their position unfairly. Also you are comparing to a brand new OS (leopard) to a 6 year old OS xp, mind you vista would come of a lot worse ;-) ala win me for the 2000's.
I do enjoy using my imac but I know the limitions of both pc and macs, and choose to use the best on for the job I need to perform. With Bootcamp you can have the best of both worlds, but now with the hacks for mac os'es on standard pcs (maybe legal or not) then if your technically minded you can you cake and eat with either option.

Private Idaho wrote:
Quote:
I have both a Mac and PC (XP).

As far as I'm concerned, the PC was a waste of money.

Oh, it runs.

But the ease of use and the things that aren't included actually make the cheap PC more expensive -- in the end -- than my $599 Mac mini, which performs astonishingly well.

For me, there's just no comparison between OS X Leopard and Windows XP.

Still use the XP computer from time to time, but it will be my last Windows computer.

I formerly made fun of Macs, but -- with the improvements made to the Mac during the past couple of years -- I think it has pulled way ahead of the PC.

Private Idaho

ShawnGBR wrote:
Quote:
Just want to say: no problems with my Mac!

I have a 2GHz Core Duo iMac with a Gig of 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM, running the not-quite-latest version of OS X (10.4.11). Seeing as the video codec used by the A-HD is native to Quicktime, editing and playing videos is a breeze.

I was wondering: maybe it might not be the processor. After all, handling video is hungry on memory. Maybe you just need more RAM. I've had situations with old computers where just upping the amount or RAM made all the difference. My last computer had 256MB, I upped it to 768MB (just half a Gig's worth) and games loaded faster, art programs saved my work quicker and macros in the programs took far less time to finish, etc.
herbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2008, 1:51 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 11
Default

The sad fact is WINDOWS is not all that great for multimedia (or for that matter -Internet) use. My old iMAC running MacOSX does a good job.

I mainly surf and view/hear web multimedia content on a 2.2Ghz Celeron-based PC (YOUTUBE/GOOLE VIDEO/ETC) with a SLACKWARE-based bootable LiveLinux-CD -called NIMBLEX. It has enough multimedia features built-in (including MOV and flash files) that its rare I need to use any other OS. And, there are THREE NimbleX flavors you can try (I use the SUB 100MB KDE Desktop edition with 1GB of RAM and a 2GB flash drive -no hard drive req'd). Simply download/burn the ISO and BOOT. Try NIMBLEX Linux out for yourself:
home: http://www.nimblex.net/index.php
download: http://www.nimblex.net/index.php?opt...d=49&Itemid=44




Another tip, on the PC/WINDOWS side, I use a FREE/GPL program called MP4CAM2AVI to convert movies from my Aiptek A-HD to AVI files when needed.

"MP4Cam2AVI is a MPEG4 to AVI converter/joiner for digital MPEG4 cameras, it makes their clips DivX/XviD compatible. MJPEG and H263 are supported as well. Program doesn't re-encode video, just passes video data to avi container".

MP4Cam2AVI works FAST:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mp4cam2avi/

gl.
wb9bbc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2008, 4:50 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
adric22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 359
Default

wb9bbc wrote:
Quote:
The sad fact is WINDOWS is not all that great for multimedia (or for that matter -Internet) use. My old iMAC running MacOSX does a good job.
Well, I don't want to turn this into a OS flame-war.. But I have to disagree. I have tried just about every operating system known to man. On my Compaq EVO (the computer I mentioned in the beginning of the thread that won't play the A-HD video files) I have run Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, many different versions of Linux, and to your surprise - even Mac OS X (A pirated version I got off of the internet) As it is, I currently run Windows XP. I can definately say that Windows XP isn't the greatest O/S of all time, but in regards to doing video editing, I have a hard time replacing it. This isn't out of personal bias, by the way. I am the kind of guy who wants to dump windows. Here are some of the reasons I keep running it:

1) very usefull video editing software such as Adobe Premiere, TMPGEnc, and Virtualdub.

2) Can't get sound to work on MacOS X, and I can't afford a real Macintosh that has equal or better CPU power than the Compaq I have now.

3) Linux has only a handfull of commercial-quality software apps available for it. All of those pretty much come bundled with most distros. Unfortunately, doesn't meet my needs on video editing. Besides, Linux has grown to be just as huge and clunky as Windows - Except for Puppy Linux, unfortunatly I can't get many apps to work on that version.

Oh.. and none of the media players for Linux are as reliable as playing video on Windows. For example, Xine (or GXine and others related) are really nice, but the performance is stiill slower that windows and often has audio/video sync problems. In fact, Xine often chokes on the videos produced by my Sanyo CG6 after about 15 seconds of playing, then I have to kill the process. Oh - and have I mentioned that I LOATHE quicktime. It is so bulky and slow, not to mention un-user friendly.

If somebody ever ports GOMPlayer to Linux, then maybe we'll talk.
adric22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2008, 6:51 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 11
Default

No flame-war here.

Merely pointing out that you may be having any number of hardware/software/misconfiguration/BIOS problems with your machine if I am having better smooth playback of my A-HD files on weaker computers that I have rescued from the trash.

On the WINDOWS side, I don't use Apples Quicktime -just Quicktime alternative codecs (and used with any number of other media players -favoring mostly VLC player that is available for nearly all platforms). I have, but do not typically use GOM Player.

{As for LINUX, there is the open CINELERRA-HD real-time video editor and many other programs (imagine what PIXAR and the like use). As for being bloated, I believe you are confusing the size of the LINUX kernel itself with what most distro's include/install for programs/libs by defualt (Redhat Enterprise Edition anyone?). Just don't install all that stuff -simple.}

Build your pen anyway you like, using anything you like -and play in it.


wb9bbc is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:35 PM.