Re^6: 2d animation

Do me a favor. Download six different ~8 hour h.264 38.8Mbps 29.97fps 1080p clips on your fastest laptop (yes, I'll wait). Fire up six instances of your fastest video player and tile them across your monitor. Mash play on all six at once. What's your ~~frame rate~~ user experience like?

Now repeat the test with a single 6-7Mbps clip. (Pick one with a visible timecode if you're worried that lossy compression would render a graph illegible.)

How did that work for you? :-)

Comment on Re^6: 2d animation

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: 2d animation by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Aug 16, 2011 at 20:48 UTC
Do me a favor. Download six different ~8 hour h.264 38.8Mbps 29.97fps 1080p clips on your fastest laptop (yes, I'll wait). Fire up six instances of your fastest video player and tile them across your monitor. Mash play on all six at once. What's your frame rate user experience like? So, you're going to try and squash 230MB of 5760x2160 into a 7MB (what? 640x480) video overlain by a scrolling line trace. are you going to sync the 6 videos and line trace? You are going to need some CPU beef to do that in anything like real time. And you are going to have to plot that line trace as a mighty thick line to avoid it getting completely lost in the noise of the background. I still think that if the graph is worth displaying, that it would be better overlain at the destination than the source, but you'll find that out. Looks like you've got your work cut out for you. Best of luck. Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.	[reply]
Re^8: 2d animation by wanna_code_perl (Friar) on Aug 16, 2011 at 21:53 UTC
Download six different ~8 hour h.264 38.8Mbps 29.97fps 1080p clips So, you're going to try and squash 230MB of 5760x2160 into a 7MB (what? 640x480) video ... An eight hour long seven megabyte video would look pretty terrible. Please at the very least learn the difference between Mbps (megabits per second: a data rate), and MB (megabytes: a storage size) before you pretend to know enough to teach me a lesson on MPEG video processing (my area of expertise for the past ten years), much less how you think a "7MB" (or 7Mbps for that matter) video must look. I still think that if the graph is worth displaying, that it would be better overlain at the destination than the source, but you'll find that out. With respect, I humbly suggest you consider sticking to what you know, without trying to repeatedly pass off complete BS as "better". By all means, shoot me a PM if you'd like to learn a little more about my application. I won't be responding again publicly.	[reply]
Re^9: 2d animation by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Aug 16, 2011 at 22:42 UTC
Hm. Whether both figures are in Mbps or MB is irrelevant, the ratio and therefore required compression rate remains the same. Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.	[reply]