Difference in video quality

When i wrote a program for video playback i found a difference between the quality of the video played by jmf and by my VLC player ( I am sure my eyes are not playing any tricks with me ) . Has anyone experienced any sort of difference in quality when played by jmf and a standard player like vlc or windows media player classic( or any other player )?

No. Both will deliver an equal quality picture. The difference comes down to rendering performance in 3D Applications or video games. The 8800GT will be able to render more frames per second than the Radeon 2600. As a secondary the difference in Video memory 256MB vs 512MB might be important if you are planning on running an second display. Running 2 displays on one video card will split the video RAM between the two displays. So basically if you plan on running a second display or playing video games I would go for the 8800GT otherwise the Radeon 2600 will do just fine.
George

Similar Messages

Is there a difference in video quality shot on MiniDV tape or HDD ?

Now that the new Macbooks lack a firewire connection, and following on from Steve Jobs comment that there are many HDD camcorders available I just wondered if there is any difference in the quality of the end video between that filmed with a MiniDV camcorder and that on a hard drive based camcorder. I have a Panasonic 3CCD camcorder that is still going strong and I think produces very good footage so I wasn't intending to replace it until it dies, but when I do replace it I want to improve on it rather than take a step backwards or sideways. If hard drive camcorders can produce better quality footage and are not just better for convenience sake I can see the point of dropping the firewire connection.
So could someone clarify this for me, and also maybe tell me what the format choice of the professionals would be?

The answer is that HDD has nothing to do with video quality. It is just another media on which the video is recorded. The selection of media has its own pros & cons independent of the video 'quality'. That said, most tape-based cams record in DV or HDV whereas most HDD based cams record in AVCHD.
Quality is subjective. You can read all about the relative merits of DV, HDV & AVCHD on the net and in this forum. HDV and AVCHD are much more highly compressed than DV but they enable hi-def, 16:9 video.
If you're an average consumer you would be hard pressed to see significant differences between these formats in the finished video other than the obvious 4:3 vs 16:9 aspect ratio difference.
As David said, you will be better off spending time looking for camcorders that have the best lenses, and learning how to shoot top quality video, then worrying about the codec or the media.

Is there a difference in Video quality between ATI & Nvidia on 24" iMac's?

I am wondering if there is a quality in video and overall appearance between the ATI HD 256MB and the Nvidia 8800 512 on the 24" iMac's?
Any feedback out there?
Thanks.
BB

No. Both will deliver an equal quality picture. The difference comes down to rendering performance in 3D Applications or video games. The 8800GT will be able to render more frames per second than the Radeon 2600. As a secondary the difference in Video memory 256MB vs 512MB might be important if you are planning on running an second display. Running 2 displays on one video card will split the video RAM between the two displays. So basically if you plan on running a second display or playing video games I would go for the 8800GT otherwise the Radeon 2600 will do just fine.
George

Video Quality: iTunes Purchase vs. DVD rip

Is there a difference in video quality between, on the one hand, buying a movie on iTunes and, on the other hand, buying a DVD and ripping it to the iPhone?

Wildattorney,
Depending on encoder used, and settings there could be no difference, or vary widely.
However, discussing ripping DVDs is a murky area of copyright, and specifically against the Terms of Use for Apple Discussions.
Hope this helps,
Nathan C.

Video quality differences (3G DUN vs Road Runner)

I've always used iChat from my RoadRunner connection and accepted the subpar video quality. The other day I was connected to my 3G (HSDPA) phone and browsing from the airport and fired up ichat and did a test video call to one of the apple3utest IDs... the incoming video was near perfect. There were no jaggies and it looked so perfect. i have taken my home router out of the mix and connected my mac directly to the cable modem and still can't get the video to be comparable. the latency on my 3G tethering connection is good (good for tethering), its usually around 250ms (where as my RoadRunner conneciton is under 100ms).. i just dont' understand why this is such a big difference between the two.

Realistically it means changing ISP.
You could try changing the iChat Preferences > Video section > Bandwidth Limit drop down to 500
I presume you have changed the System Preferences > Quicktime > Streaming tab to 1.5Mbps ?
2:58 PM Monday; September 17, 2007

IMovie HD and FCE 4: video quality difference?

Hello,
I imported 20+ hours of video and organized it in FCE4. However, as a novice amateur video artist, I find it far easier to work in the older iMovie HD than FCE4. Do you lose video quality in any way by working in this simpler application?
iMovie HD allows you to save files at "full quality" as a .dv file, but this is still compressed, right?
If I should just suck it up and learn Final Cut in order to not lose video quality, please let me know. Thanks...

The quality for the most part will be the same. Do not try to mix the two applications. They work in different formats. Either work in iMovie or learn FCE, which, if you know how to use it is, is much faster. The more complex the program becomes the faster it will be in comparison to iMovie.

MacMini - LG 32" (32LB75) Problem - Poor video quality and now no picture.

Hi there, apologies for the length of this post....
I purchased a mac mini 1.8Ghz with 2Gb RAM yesterday with a wireless keyboard and mouse and hooked it up to my 32" LG 32LB75 using VGA. On startup the display looked ok, I managed to click through the various Leopard initialisations. I bought the machine for use as a front room media player for mainly DivX movies and the occasional bit of music.
Once I had installed the DivX codec I opened a DivX file in Quicktime and selected "full screen mode." As soon as the movie started I became quite disappointed. The picture quality was quite pixelated ("noisy") and certainly not as good as when I play the same movie file from my old dell PC on the same LG tv (the dell PC has a 64Mb PCI radeon 7000 which connects to the tv using the same VGA port as the mac).
Anyway just to give the mac a fair go I thought I would try out some genuine quicktime video samples from the itunes store (this time viewed from front row)....again not brilliant.
So I thought I would investigate the screen resolution to see if I could improve things. It appeared the resolution was set to 1900 by 1200ish I say "ish" because I can't remember exactly. I then attempted to reduce the resolution and eventually I settled on one that looked quite clear with the font size big enough to be easily read. Again I tried the movie and there wasn't much (if any improvement). Whilst changing resolutions the screen would go blank for a few seconds but on one particular setting (can't remember exact numbers) the display went blank and never came back. The tv now just displays "no signal".
I despaired and connected the mac to a 17" Iiyama montior that I use with a PC and it worked ok. However each time I tried to "hot swap" back to the television I would end up with no picture.
I'm really disappointed because everything else about the mac I really like. Particularly the remote for frontrow which is precisely what I wanted it for. The problem is I've spent over £500 and now seem to have a lesser quality picture than I had to begin with (ignoring for the moment that I don't have any picture!!)
Anyway my questions are these, answers to any or all most appreciated.
1) what is the easiest way to get my mini to start displaying on my tv again?
2) what would the optimum resolution be? My television mentions 1366 x 768 in the manual
3) If the mini doesn't offer this resolution in the pick list is it advisable to "force it" using some alternative software (ie 3dexpress.de)?
4) Is the video quality affected by the software player? ie would VLC give better picture with DivX over quicktime/itunes/front row?
5) How likely is it that the video resolution of my new mac mini isn't "as good" as my old dell machine with its PCI graphics card?
6) Finally if I don't get results as good as my existing PC setup, how accomodating are apple with refunds? I bought it from a UK high-street apple store. The back of the receipt mentions a "14 day not satisfied" return policy but then goes on to say something about being "unopened"...which seems a little confusing. Ie how do you know if you're satisfied until you've actually used it?

Hi there
the solution was to remove the various display config files in leopard and then restart the machine, this got my display back on the tv (albeit off centre). To fix the "off centre issue" I used the LG "auto correct" feature from the remote control "menu > screen" options.
The apple support site describes how to remove the affected leopard display files here http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2213?viewlocale=en_US As you will see their resolution consists of 2 main steps, the first one involves starting your machine in safe mode, if this doesn't work then you proceed to the second step where you remove the files using a terminal prompt.
I didn't bother with the first step mainly because I don't think I can start my mac in safe mode since my only keyboard is wireless (bluetooth). So I connected the mac mini to a 17" LCD monitor (which thankfully did display the video signal ok) and removed all the listed files using terminal. I then shut the mac down, swapped the VGA cable back to the LCD tv restarted the mac and it detected the tv and set a resolution that worked. I then very carefully reduced the resolution down to one that was recommended by my tv (1300ish.. x 768ish??).
At this point I was back to having an acceptable signal but still a little off centre. So I used the TV remote, pressed menu, went into screen options and chose "auto correct". Picture then filled the screen perfectly.
The problem seems to be, leopard lists a bunch of resolutions that it believes your tv/display can handle but it would appear that in fact some of these resolutions are not supported by your TV and if you choose one of these your signal disappears and you can't get it back.
I would still say that I'm not 100% convinced with the mac mini's onboard graphics (I have a 1.8GHz version). I'm going to download some HD content and see if that improves things, but certainly my existing DivX collection looked a little sharper and clearer and better coloured using my old dell PC with its radeon PCI card. But the difference in picture quality is outweighed by the convenience of its size and the font row interface. I might tinker with putting Windows Media Center on it one day, perhaps that might improve things.

IPhone 6 Plus video quality is extremely poor when on Facetime and when sharing via text/message

I upgraded to the 6 plus from the 4S. Everyone that I facetime with and send videos to via text/message tells me how incredibly horrible the video quality is....especially in comparison to the way it was before I upgraded from the 4S to the 6Plus. These are people that I have always sent videos to and Facetimed with before, and they all say they can really tell a difference. So frustrating that my three year old iphone 4S is better than the new 6 plus 128gig that I just paid $500 for. We have little ones at home and this is one of the main things we use the phone for....to send vidoes and to Facetime with grandma and grandpa.
I'm on the same carrier (Verizon) that I have always been and have not changed anything. Is there a setting on the phone I can change that will help with this? I love the phone otherwise, but if it can't do this right, I'm going to return it and get my money back.
Can anyone help? Anyone experiencing this???
Thank you.

I have the same issue!! Why isn't there any answers to this problem? I became the laughing stock who owns a $1000 iPhone that can't share videos with family and friends. Please help!!!

How should I best import HD Videos from the new iPad to my mac without loosing video quality?

The new HD video on the new iPad is awesome, but it can eat up a lot of memory in no time. I would like to know what is the most recommended way to export my ipad movies to iLife on my mac without loosing image quality, so i can free up space on my iPad.
If I use iPhoto I notice that the file size of the video from the new iPad is a lot smaller then if I use iMovie to import the same video.
Example: I import a 53 second video from the new iPad to iPhoto and the imported file has a file size of 143 MB in iPhoto. (iphoto save the video as IMG_0048.mov)
I import the same video to iMovie manually and the imported file size is 843 MB in iMovie. BIG DIFFERENCE. (iMovie saves that same video as clip-2012-03-20 16;13;08.mov)
Now to really be confusing: I go to Image Capture program and locate the file manually on my iPad and is has the same name and file size is what is in iPhoto.
So either iMovie is making the File a lot larger when it imports to an event, or the file I'm looking at is actually the iPhoto version that I get because I sync with iPhoto.
The second issue that I have is that now I have 2 videos on my hard drive: one in iPhoto, and one in iMovie for a combined data storage of close to 1 GB.
I would like to be able to import ALL my iPad recording into iPhoto and then delete the video from the device when done.
But if I loose video quality, I'm not happy about that. Secondly, by importing video from my iPad into multiple iLife programs, I'm creating duplicates with sometimes different quality. Any suggestions? is there a setting in iPhoto that can do all this for me?
Robert

Don't use iphoto to deal with movies. it's not really meant for that. use Quicktime or iMovie to work with your videos

Publish+Share signifcantly reduces video quality in Premiere Elements 13

As the title states, whenever I publish and share a video in Premiere Elements 13, the video quality is drastically reduced to an almost unwatchable level compared to the original video This is even the case before any effects are added to the video. If I add the media to the timeline and then directly publish+share before any changes are done, the video quality is still ruined. When I click play full screen in elements, the quality and resolution is exactly where I want it, but once again, when I share the video, it's essentially destroyed.
When I play the newly created video there is giant black space above, below and to the sides of the video (where there is none in the original) and movement in the movie causes the video to grain with black lines.
I have been playing around with settings and researching online for a long time now but I can't seem to find the solution. What I have been doing is going publish+share, ---> Computer, ---> AVI. Then in advanced settings the video codec is selected to DV NTSC, and the basic video settings which are locked in (which I can't change) are set to quality 100, width 720, height 480. The Aspect is D1/DV NTSC (0.9091). I have selected render at maximum depth. I have also tried saving it as MPEG and other video types but the result is the same.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. I understand that I am new and have lots to learn, but it seams so strange to me that the simple process of putting a video in Elements would essentially destroy it. Thanks again.

HSTompson
It was not until Mary Lou Frost posted in your thread today that I realized that I did not see and reply to your questions in post 4 of your thread (dated December 15, 2014). Sorry about that.
If you want to match up the properties of the export file with the properties of the Timeline source media, often you need to direct your attention to
a. Publish+Share/Computer/......and trying to match up the video (especially) and audio compressions of the import with those of the export choice.
b. A frequent cause of a difference between import file size and export file size is the bitrate used by these files. The higher the bitrate, the greater the quality, but
the larger is the file size. So, trying to match import file and export file bitrates is also on the agenda. See the preset's Advanced Button/Video Tab and the settings
there for bitrate. The units for bitrate will be either kbps kilobits per second (also seen as Kbps) or Mbps megabits per second. We can go into that further if necessary.
Premiere Elements allows for the setting of one project preset which should match the properties of the source files. If you have "mixed source files", setting up the
project can become a challenge. The rule of thumb that I typically use involves setting priorities...
1. If videos and stills, I will set for the properties of the video and then size (or let the project size) the still to the frame size of the video
2. If just stills, I try for 1920 x 1080 stills and import them using a DLSR 1080p project preset...that seems to give sharper end product results when doing burn to disc.
Please review and consider and let me know if I have targeted your questions. Any questions please do not hesitate to ask. I try to respond daily to questions, so, if you do not see a timely, response, please send me an Adobe Forum private message asking me "What happened to you?".
Best wishes.
ATR

Did Apple fix the video quality issue in iMovie '09?

I am a casual video editor and iMovie 08 had the perfect user experience / functionality for what I want to do.
However, the known video quality issue (throwing away interlaced scan lines) made the result unacceptable since I archive our family video on DVDs. I have been forced to use iMovie HD for that reason. I have tried tricks such as converting the original DV files to AIF and deinterlace prior to import into iMovie08 but that did not seem to work either.
So does anyone know if Apple fixed the video quality issue in iMovie '09.
MESSAGE TO APPLE IF YOU ARE LISTENING:
Please fix the video quality in iMovie09 if not already. Yes, the quality is ok for YouTube or Internet video but for those of us who want simple editing to archive our family video we cannot accept poor video quality. Dropping an interlace field effectively halves the vertical resolution. Thank you.

Please explain this in more detail when you say Adaptive Deinterlacer. Are you talking about another program? If so, what program and what are the specific steps.
Also, sounds like you are recommending imovie09. By saying to do the above, are you saying imovie09 still causes you too loose significant quality like imovie08? Are you saying you can use imovie08 or imovie09 with these steps to get high quality video or just imovie09? I guess I just need more specifics on how you do what you are describing and how imovie09 fits into this versus imovie08. I joined this whole discussion trying to figure out if upgrading imovie09 made a difference regarding the whole quality issue. I know it has more features, but I am more concerned about he quality of the video right now. Thanks.

What video format is best for video quality?

Would anyone care to comment on what video format is recommended to achieve the best video quality in Encore when burning to a 25 GB Blu-ray disc? I have the choice of saving my HD video that will be imported into Premier Pro CS4 (and then sent to Encore CS4) in .mp4, .mt2s or .ts and I'm not sure which one will give me the best results. Thanks in advance for the insight!
Ken

does that mean that one is not necessarily "better" than the other?
That is correct.
Now, some feel that with the MP4 H.264 that there are differences between the Apple, the Lead and the MainConcept H.264. Each supplier has a "camp of followers."
Hunt

Apple tv video quality vs hd tv and high def dvd's

ok...i know it supports 1080i, but does the video quality of video in itunes really look good compared against say a blu-ray disc, or hdtv signals? i'm sure it will get better (with a hardware or software upgrade?) if its not close to high def quality but want to know what i'm in store for if i buy appletv now...thanks. PS: i currently have directv HD and a ps3 for blu-ray, and my tv's are all HD...

Based on my own testing, the distinctions between an HD-DVD movie (which are true 1080) and an Apple TV video converted as its own maximum settings (which is 720) is actually quite noticeable if you have a 1080 TV set, but at the same I don't consider it a show-stopper. I watch a lot of HD broadcast content that's only 720p, and it's still very good.
An HD-DVD or Blu-Ray DVD will normally be in 1920 x 1080 resolution (1080p or 1080i, generally depending on your equipment). The Apple TV's maximum resolution is 1280 x 720 (basically 720p). Therefore, even an original HD-DVD or Blu-Ray DVD converted to Apple TV will need to be scaled down to 720p for display on the Apple TV.
Further, Elgato EyeTV actually scales these down somewhat lower, so HDTV recorded content could be even worse-off, depending on the original source. The standard Apple TV export settings use a 960 x 540 frame in order to keep the bit-rate and frame rate within tolerances (since a 720p signal is approximately 60fps, and the bitrates will generally exceed 5-6 mbps, which pushes the limits of the Apple TV).
Even more interestingly, Elgato's new turbo.264 dongle will only encode in "Apple TV" format at a maximum resolution of 800 x 600 (and if you do the math you will realize that this will be considerably less for a 16:9 aspect ratio video).
The result is that videos converted from an EyeTV Hybrid are technically much worse off on the Apple TV than viewing the original source material. Whether this is significant enough to be noticeable will depend on your output medium, but on my 62" DLP, the difference is quite apparent (although still far superior to an SDTV signal).
You can get 1280 x 720 content to play back at 60fps at 5mbps bit-rates on the Apple TV by using ffmpeg-based encoders and manually selecting higher settings, although it's been hit-and-miss in my own testing, and of course it creates gargantuan files. Elgato and others have obviously tried to stay with the more conservative settings to ensure that they can guarantee the broadcast possible range of support.
In fact, although most of the standard encoder settings max out at 2.5-3.0 mbps, I've successfully pushed up to 6 mbps through the Apple TV, although such content has to be synced rather than streamed, since even an 802.11n network has a hard time keeping up (it worked, but there were some drop-outs and glitches in the process). Of course, 6mbps content is going to fill up the Apple TV hard drive pretty quickly as well (you'd only be able to fit around 11 hours on the internal 40GB hard drive).
The other thing to keep in mind with DVD movies is that they come from film, which is a 24fps source (based on the physical nature of film). As a result, the distinctions between a 720p and 1080i signal are less prevalant when dealing with film content, since you won't get the full 60fps HDTV capabilities anyway. Interlacing can still create some nasty side-effects, but it's far less of an issue when you're dealing with less than half of the normal frames.
In my own experiences, I have an Apple TV that is connected to a 1080p upscaling DLP TV (native 1080i input, internalized de-interlacing), and a second Apple TV that is connected to a 720p LCD TV. With the first Apple TV, I can notice the difference between 720p and 1080i output settings only when viewing photos, since the remainder of the standard content doesn't exceed 720p anyway. Further, because my TV de-interlaces a 1080i signal to 1080p, I don't get the flicker that is normally associated with a 1080i signal.
On the second Apple TV, I leave the setting to 720p, since that's the native resolution of the second TV, and I get noticeable interlacing-based flickering on the 1080i, particularly with photo slideshows (mostly in the transitions).

Importing mpeg2 and video quality of final DVD

I had a company create an mpeg2 file from a master for a dvd project I'm authoring. I'm not sure what format the master is on, I'm guessing BetaSP but it is something other than a DV format which is all I can handle. When my client saw the finished DVD I authored he was unhappy with the video quality, it is noisy/grainy. I told him I that is how I received it from this company (the company houses all of my client's masters) but he said his master was of higher quality. So we asked the company what the deal was and they are telling me these two things, both of which I don't believe.
My client had sent them the check disc (an authored dvd) I sent him and I sent the mpeg2 file back to them. They claim that the video quality is worse on the check disc because when you author a DVD it transcodes the files when it creates the vob files. Now the mpeg2 file imported into Encore fine and Encore defaulted to it being "do not transcode". So encore as far as I know definitely did no transcoding. Is there any validity to what they are saying? I don't think so.
They also claim that for optimum video quality I should've requested the master be transfered to DVCAM (dvcam I can indeed handle). So they are saying going from the master to dvcam to mpeg2 would be better than going from master to mpeg2. That makes no sense to me. If the master is DigiBeta, going from digibeta to the lesser quality dvcam and then to mpeg is the best route? Now way right? It seems to me that THEIR mpeg2 encoder just isn't any good.
Any thoughts would be appreciated (so I can argue my case).
thanks
Ryan

I agree with Joe.
DVCAM from DigiBeta is no quality increase at all. If anything (depending on the digibeta) you're dropping quality. You're certainly not gaining anything.
Correct workflow for DVD Authoring with DigiBeta masters is as follows:
1 - Transfer from DigiBeta to NLE Workstation.
2 - Edit as required
3 - Export from workstation to final version*
4 - Create DVD - and the biggest difference is going to be what is used - and
i how
it is used - to do the MPEG-2 encoding that the DVD application will require. MPEG encoding is not a matter of bashing out a PRESET from a menu. That will
i never
give the highest quality. MPEG encoding is every bit as much an art form as the shooting, cutting & producing of the film in the first place, and is a skill that takes both time & experience to learn properly.
NB.
* = This has been a bone of contention for a while now. It is often recommended to go to DV AVI as the interim format, but for absolute highest possible quality, this is not really true as DV AVI (DVCAM) is a compressed form, albeit lightly. Some prefer a more filmic look to their footage (which DV will never give you).
It's all swings & roundabouts. The final Master (for us) is usually a 10 bit Blackmagic type file, or an uncompressed AVI file. Expect to see around 40Gb/hour in this form, even more with a 10 bit file. Does going to 10 bits make a difference? As long as you do not have your NLE set to 8 bits, you bet it does!

IChat video quality better with .Mac subscriber than with AIM?

The quality of my video chats with one brother who also has a .Mac account is noticeably better than my chats with another brother, who uses iChat with an AIM account. I'm in the US, they are both in UK. All of us have almost identical iMacs. The one with the AIM account supposedly has a faster Internet connection. My question: is the video quality of iChat better if both users have .Mac accounts than if one has an AIM account?

The Screen names make no difference.
It is about a combination of Proccessor, Video card in iChat 4, internet Connection and settings and the amount of Bandwidth you get out of that connection.
As Defcom (UK) has said start with those basic Settings.
In iChat 3 and 2 the Quicktime setting when on Automatic is read as a 0 (zero) and this effectively Caps iChat.
In iChat 4 the Automatic setting is seen as 384k which is the MINIMUM for a 4 way chat.
As far as an Internet Connection goes this should be at Least 100k in both Up and Downloads.
Due to some data stream management to cut down on Peer-to-Peer file Sharing it pays to limit iChat in the Video Section Bandwidth Limit section to slip under the Radar as it were. There are two main ISP doing this Comcast and Road Runner in the States.
Verizon offer a FioS fibre service that is not that stable in speeds and jumps all over the place which is then too fast for iChat to keep up and that should use the cap in iChat Preferences as well.
8:08 PM Friday; June 20, 2008

Difference in video quality

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for