Moritz Barsnick <barsn...@gmx.net> writes: > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 18:38:48 +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote: >> | faster | 106.2 | 7 | >> | veryfast | 83.2 | 5 | >> | superfast | 177.4 | 4 | > [...] >> So it looks like I should always use superfast. (But probably a good >> idea to test it with a few other videos.) > > Funny, I had the same result with the *one* video I experimented with a > few years ago. I believe your bracketed sentence is the important one: > Do test this on plenty of videos. Some content will behave differently > than others.
Well, it looks like it is 'generic'. Yesterday I had done 12 files that where total 2.1 GB. When doing veryslow they where 443.6 MB en took 6:04. Today I did it with veryfast: it took 0:40 (so about 9 times as fast) and they where 333.6 MB. So about 25% smaller. In all twelve individual cases the veryfast is smaller as the veryslow, but not in all cases the same amount. I find that really weird. -- Cecil Westerhof Senior Software Engineer LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".