The official thread for any and all discussion related to Apple Inc.

The new MacBook!


  • Total voters
    47

jamesbond007

 MacManiac
^^^ The good thing about using QTP for video conversion is that it is optimized to utilize the multi core processors, this I noticed increases the quality of the converted video.
The other good thing is that QTP exports video to most of the formats we ever need.
Now, did you know that you can make a pretty decent movie with the clips you shot on your camcorder with all the graphics, background score and credits ??
 

goobimama

 Macboy
QT is much slower than VisualHub. You could also use iTunes (which uses the same QT engine, except there you can queue files). iFlicks is also another app that uses the QT engine + adds meta info, stuff like that. Then there's the OSS handbrake (not sure if it's suitable for conversion though).
 

jamesbond007

 MacManiac
^^^ Of course VisualHub is lightening fast, if you encode DVDrips, Mpegs then VisualHub is all you need. I am talking about Matroska, when you encode mkv both QT and VisyalHub are slow but as QT utlilizes all the cores of your processor the quality of the encoded video is great. I almost always convert mkv to iPhone and the resulting video is crisp, much better than what VisualHub does with mkv.
 

goobimama

 Macboy
Why doesn't Airport automatically connect to the default Wireless network after a power cut ??
What-choo mean by this kiddo? And have you added the network name to your 'preferred networks'?
 

goobimama

 Macboy
Why doesn't Airport automatically connect to the default Wireless network after a power cut ??
What-choo mean by this kiddo? And have you added the network name to your 'preferred networks'?
 

infra_red_dude

Wire muncher!
....VisyalHub are slow but as QT utlilizes all the cores of your processor the quality of the encoded video is great
Errr.. utilizing all the cores doesn't magically make the quality of video great. It only affects the speed at which encoding takes place. It has nothing to do with the quality. Its the codec and the related parameters which decide the quality of the video.
 

jamesbond007

 MacManiac
goobimama said:
have you added the network name to your 'preferred networks'?

Of course I have. I think you have not understood my problem. Keep your mac connected to internet, now turn off your router. Airport will be grayed out. Now turn on your router, after a min or so Airport should detect your preferred network and connect to it automatically, but sadly it doesn't.
Any basic windows laptop or a PC with a wifi card will automatically connect to a preferred network the moment it discovers it.

@infra_red_dude

I have taken a look at the same video encoded with a single core processor and a dual core processor. Besides the decrease in speed the quality of the encoded video is improved with a 2 core processor.
 

gxsaurav

You gave been GXified
I have taken a look at the same video encoded with a single core processor and a dual core processor. Besides the decrease in speed the quality of the encoded video is improved with a 2 core processor.

The quality of video doesn't depend on CPU cores or multi CPU. It depends on the source file, source resolution etc. However, with multiple CPU you can render a video with many filters applied faster & easily so yeah, that could improve the quality.
 

dinesh72

Journeyman
does it make sense to rip dvds in .mkv format. i was once fascinated by avi(xvid) but the video is not so great on bigger tvs. managing discs is a big task as they tend to get deteriorated!
 

jamesbond007

 MacManiac
picture2fgm.jpg


Yes yes... I have an iPhone too!!
Been using my bro's iPhone for a while now but nothing like having my own :)
 

jamesbond007

 MacManiac
^^^I don't know I couldn't wait. I got iPhone 2G, 16GB with 1.1.3 FW. If the new iPhone has HD screen or a great Camera, I'd consider buying it after a couple of months of its release
 

IronManForever

IronMan; Ready to Roll...
^ And my first iPhone would be unlocked CDMA version. Other things could remain same, although I would prefer a smaller size, more so if it brings costs down.
 

IronManForever

IronMan; Ready to Roll...
gxsaurav said:
The quality of video doesn't depend on CPU cores or multi CPU. It depends on the source file, source resolution etc. However, with multiple CPU you can render a video with many filters applied faster & easily so yeah, that could improve the quality.
I still find it arguable that uni/multi cores bring any 'Quality' difference at all. Difference should be only about time.
About many filters being applied faster & easily, how does that affect quality again? Filters will still be applied in any case. I am not knowledgeable in this though.

Maybe the difference is in the software (QT engine). I think it dynamically scales to the available CPU horsepower and selectively applies filters, hence the change in quality. No other apparent reason, huh?
 
Top Bottom