Am 17.08.20 um 08:30 schrieb Mark Filipak:
> On 08/17/2020 02:24 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Am 17.08.20 um 02:07 schrieb Mark Filipak:
>>> On 08/16/2020 05:30 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.08.20 um 19:14 schrieb Carl Zwanzig:
> Reindl is known for acerbic and unhelpful answers, AFAICT
On 08/17/2020 02:24 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.08.20 um 02:07 schrieb Mark Filipak:
On 08/16/2020 05:30 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.08.20 um 19:14 schrieb Carl Zwanzig:
Reindl is known for acerbic and unhelpful answers, AFAICT most readers
ignore them.
there is nothing acerbic or unhe
Am 17.08.20 um 02:07 schrieb Mark Filipak:
> On 08/16/2020 05:30 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Am 16.08.20 um 19:14 schrieb Carl Zwanzig:
>>> Reindl is known for acerbic and unhelpful answers, AFAICT most readers
>>> ignore them.
>>
>> there is nothing acerbic or unhelpful point to common sense tha
On 08/16/2020 05:30 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.08.20 um 19:14 schrieb Carl Zwanzig:
Reindl is known for acerbic and unhelpful answers, AFAICT most readers
ignore them.
there is nothing acerbic or unhelpful point to common sense that a new
codec with better quality or smaller files (and if
Am 16.08.20 um 19:14 schrieb Carl Zwanzig:
> Reindl is known for acerbic and unhelpful answers, AFAICT most readers
> ignore them.
there is nothing acerbic or unhelpful point to common sense that a new
codec with better quality or smaller files (and if both is ecpected)
comes with a logical cost
> Am 16.08.2020 um 19:14 schrieb Carl Zwanzig :
>
> Reindl is known for acerbic and unhelpful answers
There are several reasons why you should be extremely careful with such
comments, please consider this a little warning.
Carl Eugen
___
ffmpeg-user
> Am 16.08.2020 um 19:02 schrieb Cecil Westerhof :
>
> By the way: when searching on the internet, I saw often said that 265
> would be half as big as 264, but I see 'only' a third less space
> taken. Are the people saying 50% overly optimistic, or do I just have
> 'strange' videos?
You complet
Am 16.08.20 um 19:02 schrieb Cecil Westerhof:
> Reindl Harald writes:
>
>> Am 16.08.20 um 16:48 schrieb Cecil Westerhof:
>>> I heard a lot that you should libx265 instead of libx264. I did not,
>>> because at some places that went wrong. (I think uploading. But it is
>>> several years ago, so I
Reindl is known for acerbic and unhelpful answers, AFAICT most readers
ignore them.
On 8/16/2020 10:02 AM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
For the moment I will keep with 264. Especially because these files
are only played once. Just wanted to make sure I was not overlooking
something.
Probably not
Reindl Harald writes:
> Am 16.08.20 um 16:48 schrieb Cecil Westerhof:
>> I heard a lot that you should libx265 instead of libx264. I did not,
>> because at some places that went wrong. (I think uploading. But it is
>> several years ago, so I am not sure.)
>> I am again playing with ffmpeg and cre
Am 16.08.20 um 16:48 schrieb Cecil Westerhof:
> I heard a lot that you should libx265 instead of libx264. I did not,
> because at some places that went wrong. (I think uploading. But it is
> several years ago, so I am not sure.)
> I am again playing with ffmpeg and creating new scripts.
> When us
I heard a lot that you should libx265 instead of libx264. I did not,
because at some places that went wrong. (I think uploading. But it is
several years ago, so I am not sure.)
I am again playing with ffmpeg and creating new scripts.
When using libx265 the file size is about a third smaller, but it
12 matches
Mail list logo
