On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Henk D. Schoneveld <belca...@zonnet.nl> wrote: > >> On 12 May 2015, at 13:50, Werner Robitza <werner.robi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Henk D. Schoneveld <belca...@zonnet.nl> >> wrote: >>> Would you be so kind to explain why to NOT use the crf option? >> >> CRF is essentially a constant quality mode, which results in variable >> bitrate depending on the spatiotemporal complexity of the scenes. > Your goal is max quality within a given link-capacity I assume. > Upfront choosing an arbitrary bitrate to achieve max possible quality seems > sub-optimal/contradictionary to me. > A. to many bits for talking heads > B. to few bits for action dominant events.
Yes, but that's still what's typically done, unless you choose a CQ encoding type with a max-rate (which is what libvpx recommends too). You should've mentioned that you're experienced with this -- otherwise I would've given a different answer. > I see the difference between the methods, but I don’t really understand what > it’s trying to tel me. What does the X-axis say, total stream-size/#frames/ ? It's the frame number (index) in a 3 minute sequence. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
