Am Sa., 15. Aug. 2020 um 13:01 Uhr schrieb Cecil Westerhof <[email protected]>: > > In the past the original file was between 4 to 13 times bigger as the > compressed file.
As I tried to explain in the other thread: Even neglecting the fact that you seem to believe your camera does an uncompressed recording (it does not), size is by itself no useful metric for any modern video codec (modern: Anything since the early nineties). The oldest "modern" video codec (from 1991) can easily produce significantly smaller files. Only if you take file size and quality together can you get a metric that may make sense. Note that only subjective blind tests are really meaningful, everything automated (like SSIM and PSNR) does not measure what the human eye sees - but is probably better than no quality metric at all. A particular quality setting at encoding time does not give you a particular comparable quality of the output file. And just to repeat what was already written: FFmpeg does not compress in your command line, x264 does the compression. Carl Eugen _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list [email protected] https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email [email protected] with subject "unsubscribe".
