Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Sanyo

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 11, 2007, 6:53 AM   #91
Member
 
anjoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 87
Default

Charbax,

Please could you try to re-encode an original HD1000 video file
in .avi with the fantastic <<< Mp4Cam2AVI >>> ?

It's very well working on MP4 H264 file from CA65
... but HD1000 ?

Mp4Cam2AVI downloadable here :
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mp4cam2avi/

Thank's ;-)
anjoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2007, 9:35 AM   #92
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 16
Default

I don't think that theMp4Cam2AVI software lets you encode from H264 to Mpeg4 AVI..
Charbax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2007, 9:47 AM   #93
Senior Member
 
Wayne12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,071
Default

Charbax, thanks for posting the videos. The problem with recoding formats, is that they have to be significantly higher data-rate quality to work with. For example, with an DVD, they condition the footage, and probably strip out grain noise, for better compression. So DVD at 6mb/s might be equivalent to untreated footage shoot at 12mb/s (no guarantee because situations vary). But for professional quality work (and error encoding etc) you might want twice as much again to play with and adjust. So, DivX camera might need probably twice the data-rate of DivX player.

But for what you do on video Blogging, Kodak Mpeg4 still camera (approximately 8mb/s Mpeg4) or Aiptek sub 5Mb/s h264 might be good.

If you want the best commercial consumer compression then an VP7 codec player gets better compression than h264 at lower processing power (on non supporting hardware). I don't know if flash still uses previouse version Vp6. But because of bad support, divx is probably still more practical.

Anjoy, I agree with you good on them. http://one.revver.com/watch/392222 also has direct download.
Wayne12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2007, 10:05 AM   #94
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 16
Default

That sounds great Wayne. I do guess though that every new generation of Mpeg4 H263 HD or H264 HD encoding chips improve in the quality they can apply to the variable bitrate files they produce. So I don't know if those chips will ever achieve the same compression as when the video is compressed using multiple passes on the computer, or when one uses for example the Insane encoding mode with B-frames of DivX using a computer, which usually encodes at less then a few frames per second using a fat dual-core computer.

Another feature that I think would be nice, would be a camcorder that would shoot both 720p at Internet-ready VBR bitrates and 1080p at the maximum bitrate at the same time, maybe it would be able to do that by simply including two chips. This way each film made would have a 720p version made ready to be uploaded directly, maybe even with the cameras built-in WiFi, and then also store a full quality 1080p version on the solid state or hard drive memory.
Charbax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2007, 10:47 AM   #95
Senior Member
 
Wayne12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,071
Default

The Ambarella type parallel precessing chip already far exceeds and dual core PC. You can probably get what you are looking for. Somebody mentioned over at an Aiptek HD thread, that it's 5mb/s h264 footage is mostly B frames.

I suppose that some of the process of super compression can be automated, some might still need to be handpicked. However, that is why I suggested the Aiptek, for blogging, the process does not have to be perfect, as quality is not paramount.
Wayne12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2007, 10:41 PM   #96
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 58
Default

Anjoy - Even though this is off topic, it applies to HD 1000 as well so I'm going to go ahead - I recommend the Wolverine Data Storage, specifically their cheap and reliable Flash Pac models. I have one and it had no problem copying the files from my Xacti CG65 SDHC card and then exporting them back to my computer. Of course you won't be able to see the video files, but at least you'll be able to download them and re-use your card.

IcelandFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2007, 9:07 PM   #97
Member
 
anjoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 87
Default

Wayne12, IcelandFan, THANK YOU VERY MUCH for your help :roll:
-> and for accepting this question of storage here ;-)
Otherwise, help me please to know where to post it...

After receiving your Wolverine link, I visit many forums and online shops for this model Wolverine FlashPac.
Here is what I have red on the negativ side: please confirm...

"Transfert rate 427Mb in 4'30''
- It mean's about 1.5Mg/s" ---> 2G= 22 min... Little bit slow isn'it ?

"Have to format in Fat32 with min. 2partitions"
- Is it true ?

"The unit automatically turns off after downloading : have to wait more then 20min. to see the short message: "download successful"
No way to know after that how many photos were copied"

- Is it true ?

Another owner :
"with its 6300 rpm, when I format it as NTFS, I use it as to download (by computer) my videos from my video camera via firewire."
- Does it mean it need NTFS for VIDEO?

"Cannot browse the contents of the Wolverine (how many folders, folder names, file quantity and names) except when it is plugged in to a computer."
- Is it true ?

Anyway I would be happy to find one IN EUROPE !
---> only USA ;-(((

Only one week before my flight to Greek Ilands... ;-)

I found this one :
What do you think about this Digital Foci model 40G /SDHC compatible, only 114$:
---> http://www.adorama.com/DFPS40G.html
?
anjoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2007, 1:50 AM   #98
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 16
Default

I recommend the Archos 605 WiFi, there is a special $239 price for the 30GB model if you follow the instructions at http://forum.archosfans.com/viewtopic.php?t=6819

There is a possibillity that the Archos will playback 720p content directly filmed with a camcorder such as the HD1000, although that HD video playback firmware hasn't been released yet, it has only been announced, so it has not been tested if it will work.
Charbax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2007, 8:02 AM   #99
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 73
Default

The music video looks great - the detail in the girl's skin is excellent - but I couldn't get the raw train clip to play at all.

QT7.2 just has it as green, and VLC plays it but it's all melted and distorted looking. I hope this doesn't mean that the HD1000's codec is incompatible with Mac (that would be very strange).

Are any other Mac users able to play that clip, or are there any other demo raw clips out there?
istara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2007, 9:25 AM   #100
Senior Member
 
Wayne12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,071
Default

It is hard to believe how many "incompatibilities" companies can work into what is supposed to be an "standard". These incompatibilities might be because of poor design, or commercial interests (to stop compatibility for commercial gain). They should have codec standards that define an acceptable way to read compressed data but customisable format to write the data, and customisable header+footer package structure, and STICK TO IT!

Then they would pick an video codec, an audio codec, and additional packaging, and any player could go to the video/audio data and play it.
Wayne12 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 10:06 PM.