This forum uses cookies
This forum makes use of cookies to store your login information if you are registered, and your last visit if you are not. Cookies are small text documents stored on your computer; the cookies set by this forum can only be used on this website and pose no security risk. Cookies on this forum also track the specific topics you have read and when you last read them. Please confirm whether you accept or reject these cookies being set.

A cookie will be stored in your browser regardless of choice to prevent you being asked this question again. You will be able to change your cookie settings at any time using the link in the footer.

Codec Speed vs Size Tests
#3
At least we can see that FFV1 is fast and effectively reduce file size if there is no grain.
FFV1 is faster and more effective than x264 Lossless.
Cineform "Visually Lossless" is extremely fast and size vs quality may be adjusted in very large limits. FS modes are "Film Scan" they where introduced as maximum possible visually lossless quality modes that preserve grainy film and video structure.
ProRes 422HQ 10-bit is "Visually Lossless" but same time 1.8-1.9 less in size than x264 "Real Lossless" 422 10-bit
Upscaling bit depth and chroma sampling increases file size a lot.

By the way, as it was noticed earlier - standalone filter for Hybrid that allow to change bit depth and chroma sampling may be useful option.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Codec Speed vs Size Tests - by shijan - 11.09.2021, 11:11
RE: Codec Speed vs Size Tests - by Selur - 11.09.2021, 11:15
RE: Codec Speed vs Size Tests - by shijan - 11.09.2021, 11:35
RE: Codec Speed vs Size Tests - by Selur - 11.09.2021, 11:47
RE: Codec Speed vs Size Tests - by shijan - 11.09.2021, 12:01
RE: Codec Speed vs Size Tests - by Selur - 11.09.2021, 12:04
RE: Codec Speed vs Size Tests - by shijan - 11.09.2021, 14:49

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)