[theora] theora 1.1 beta 3 sample encodings

[John Kintree]

Agreed.  To my eyes, 
6.8 MB fx35_overview-1.1-v-5.ogv is better than
7.8 MB fx35_overview-1.0-v-3.ogv
and both of them are "good enough."  Clear and smooth.
Also, IMHO, 
4.7 MB fx35_overview-1.1-v-3.ogv is so much poorer quality in full screen mode than either of the other samples that I would not consider it good enough.  The artifacts are too distracting.
Thanks,
John Kintree

--- On Wed, 9/16/09, Christopher Blizzard <blizzard at mozilla.com> wrote:

From: Christopher Blizzard <blizzard at mozilla.com>
Subject: Re: [theora] theora 1.1 beta 3 sample encodings
To: "John Kintree" <jkintree at swbell.net>
Cc: theora at xiph.org
Date: Wednesday, September 16, 2009, 9:55 PM

It's also a lot bigger, as you point out.  I'm told that the scales between 1.0 and 1.1 changed quite a bit so -v 3 doesn't mean quite the same thing in 1.1 as it did in 1.0.  If you want to compare you should compare two files that are roughly the same size.  For example when I compare:

http://people.mozilla.org/~blizzard/videos/theora-1.0-vs-1.1/fx35_overview-1.0-v-3.ogv (7.8MB)
to
http://people.mozilla.org/~blizzard/videos/theora-1.0-vs-1.1/fx35_overview-1.1-v-5.ogv (6.8MB)

I can see a lot of difference in the quality of the videos.  In the first frame the Firefox logo is much crisper looking in the 1.1 videos.  And the Firefox text at the bottom is also crisp with a lot less noise around it.

Don't focus on the -v setting - focus on the size.  If you can do the same quality at a smaller size we win.  We also win if you can do a better quality at the same size.  And that does seem to be the case here.

Thanks!

--Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/theora/attachments/20090917/ca03c738/attachment.htm