H.264 vs. MPEG-4 video, which is better quality?

Which is better quality? H.264 or MPEG-4? Is one more compressed than the other? I'm putting video on my iPod and also may want to output to television from the iPod, so I'd also like to know which is better for that as well in addition to which is better in general.

H.264 is significantly more compressed than typical MPEG-4. MPEG-4 naturally would be better quality to the discerning eye, and is not as dependent on the speed of your processor and the strength of your GPU as H.264 is. I managed to get a 320 x 240 video of H.264 compressed to be 200 Megabytes for a 2.5 hour video. On a G5 iMac 1.8 Ghz the playback was fine. Trying the same video on a slower Mac there was significant amount of stuttering of the video itself. Experiment with some one minute shorts and measure the file size and see which has better quality on what you are playing it back on. If you can tell the difference, then go with the higher quality format. Certainly keep a higher quality format burnt to DVD in case you need to recreate from the original.

Similar Messages

Which yields better quality images?

Which yields better quality images?
If I "send" my slideshow from iPhoto to iDVD? Or if I start in iDVD and import a slideshow from iPhoto?

That’s the same thing.
The problem is that iPhoto needs to make a movie of the slideshow to export. This inevitably involves compression. Then, when iDVD prepares the movie for burning, it also compresses. Many folks find the quality drop off too great when the material is doubly compressd.
One solution is to create the Slideshow in iDVD, though that has limitations too - no Ken Burns effect, fo instance. But there’s only one layer of compression.
Another way is to create the Movie in +as high a quality as possible+. Some ways to do this: Export the slideshow from iPhoto using the new high quality options. Alternatively, use another app that has more export options - PhotoToMovie, Final Cut Express, perhaps even iMovie HD - to get a high quality movie, and so minimise the impact of the compression.
Regards
TD

MPEG-2 vs. mini DV - Which is better quality?

I want to transfer video from VHS tapes into iMovie. Which is going to give me better quality?:
A) Copy VHS to mini DV tape on my camcorder and then import into iMovie.
or
B) Copy VHS to DVD with my VHS/DVD recorder combo player and then transfer the DVD to iMovie using Apple MPEG-2 Player.
Thanks!
David

Hi Greg,
VERY good question! I think, we have three groups:
* the poor guys who have bought a "dvd camcorder"...- I don't have a clue, why I should record on a mini-dvd instead of a cheap tape...- the compression codec used on such machines is by definition! no editable format, so you allways need workarounds...
there should be a warning on that boxes "for playback only!"
(besides: the mpeg2-format allows to store video that way, you can edit it later, has to do with i-Frames etc... but that is not the way, Sony & Co goes...)
* using "older" homebrewn dvds...- ok, maybe somewhere are the old tapes... but where? and on that tape where do I find THAT scene? isn't it easier, to throw the DVD I made and copy that into iM?..... again: people see the fantastic pic quality of a DVD made with iDVD and think, "press play and record!".. THAT would be nice
* re-edit commercial DVDs... you made your personal version of StarWars, Episode XVII, and you are not that good in CGI as ILM... so, you want to copy a few frames from the disc on your shelf...- or, "forget all that plot, I want all Bruce Lee fighting scenes on ONE disc!" (<< ... "favorites", as we do in iTunes with playlist!)
you could make BIG Bucks with a 49$ tiny, shiny white box, analogue-in >> firewire out, which is recognized by iM....- ;-))

Which is better quality for watching a pre downloaded movie airplay or HMDI?

I have the new Retnia. I have an apple tv and high quality HDMI cable. If I want watch a 900P movie from my laptop to my up to 1080p tv which would be more reliable/better quality? BTW the movie is predownloaded so it WOULD NOT be streamming.
Thanks!

My guess is the HDMI cable will yield better quality than AirPlay. Since you already have an HDMI cable and a Mac that supports AirPlay, why not try both for yourself then report back here with your results?

Touch or Classic? Which is better (quality)?

Which is better in terms of sound quality?

Classics. The Older 5.5 gens and Older series Ipods. The Newer 5.5 gens and the 6th Gens use a new sound chip. Same as for the Ipod Touches but Im not 100% sure with the Iphones.
Be careful though, The Ipods with that use the old style sound chip, which is far superior in quality of sound, wasn't soldered well and the chip can seperate with The constant temperature change and unobserved pressure applied to the unit when its in your pocket, book bag... ect.
Now Im not going to say that is 100% positive. Its just from experience owning a few new and older Ipods/Iphones.
Besides, How many older Mp3 plays can literally blow out your Earbuds{quality earbuds} if played too loud. I owned Bose Series{IE 2} in ear headphones and klipsch In ear Headphones{S5I Rugged series}.... The Key word is "Owned" lol.
Find an Older model that works great and compare it to the newer models. You will Hear the DIfference... or make you deaf in the process LOL.

Embed video or stream video which works better

Can anyone give the differences between streaming video or embeding it in a web page. Why would you do one above the other. The only major difference I see is that with streaming, the server doing the streaming can be anywhere. This means less bandwith used for you web server. What other things are there.
Mark

I have about 8000 feet of very old home movies I am
going to get scanned by one of the many companies out
there that provide this service. Some will scan and
dump DV format, other will dump HDV format.
Since I'm not doing the capture and I want to use FCP
to edit and do the final composing what are the
advantages/pitfalls of the different formats? I am a
nuibe when it comes to FCP and video editing for that
matter but it appears, at least to me from what I've
read, that DV works with FCP better for editing as it
is true frame by frame reproduction. HDV on the
other hand I can only edit the i-Frames and I believe
I need to do a transcode or something on that order
to work with it FCP. Is this true?
MacMini, MacPro Mac OS X
(10.4.9) Linux FC5, FC6 servers
I think you should make the most of this situation and go with Studio X's suggestion to DVCPRO HD and find a way to archive to tape or Blueray for backup. You will like the all I frame editing. If you can only find HDV 1080i you will be able to down convert with a rental Sony HDV camera to DV. Edit now in DV and have HDV on mini-dv tape for your family’s future needs. This is a no brainier. HDV is only the beginning of highly compressed formats to come and it really looks beautiful. HDV is a great acquisition method. Plus you can have HDV captured to DVCPRO HD. Have one reel done at the local place and see for yourself.
Good Luck
Z1&V1user

'Which is better quality?' EVGA or MSI - Nvidia GeForce GTX 760

Hiya
I am looking for feedback and suggestions on which manufacturer creates the best video card hardware particularly the 760 I am currently looking at two cards but am also open to other suggestions and feedback on cards
has anyone had any experience with MSI video cards?
these are the two cards I currently have in mind
EVGA SuperClocked 02G-P4-2765-KR GeForce GTX 760 2GB
newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130932
MSI Gaming N760 TF 2GD5/OC GeForce GTX 760 2GB
newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127745
does the MSI have any advantage over EVGA in longevity with something like solid state Japanese capacitors? I am kinda looking for a card that will last the longest with out warranty support ect
and do MSI cards have rust problems? I thought I would ask just to be sure when I made a account I saw this thread at top of forum with a picture that will surely haunt my dreams
forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=171735.0

This is an MSI forum. Discussing competing brand's products is not allowed. The MSI card is a great one. Google it and check online reviews.
Quote
and do MSI cards have rust problems?
No, I'm using all kinds of MSI vgas for more than 10 years and have never seen anything like the pic in that thread. It's something the user did physically to this card as that doesn't happen just after time.

Mpeg 2 to dv for better quality on idvd

I recently made a film with two cameras one a samsung dv and the other is sony hdd sr42. The movies look great in quick time, on the web, and idvd preview. The sony hdd stuff looks better than the dv, but when I burn the dvd though my dv material is great but my sony hdd stuff looks bad. The video seems to distort whenever there is movement on camera like it can't keep up. I've looked through other posts and have not came up with an answer. My own theory is if I can convert my hdd mpeg2 files to dv it would work. So my questions.
1. I don't know how to convert mpeg2 to dv?
2. Would this help with the poor quality I'm seeing on the dvd parts where my sony cam is in use?
Message was edited by: mixmastermw
Message was edited by: mixmastermw

1. Mpeg2 (the standard DVD format) is a delivery format not intended for editing.
You need to convert the VOB files back to DV which iMovie is designed to handle. For that you need mpegStreamclip:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/video/mpegstreamclip.html
which is free, as well as the Apple mpeg2 plugin :
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/mpeg2/
which is a mere $20.
Another possibility is to use DVDxDV:
http://www.dvdxdv.com/NewFolderLookSite/Products/DVDxDV.overview.htm
which costs $25.
Obviously the foregoing only applies to DVDs you have made yourself, or other home-made DVDs that have been given to you. It will NOT work on copy-protected commercial DVDs, which in any case would be illegal.
2. I would put money on it!

Slow burn vs Fast burn (which is better quality) fact or fiction

Ok again I would like to know the official answer to this question because from the response last time, I'm not really confidence with the answer.
IS IT FACT THAT IF YOU USE WAV BURNER AND BURN AT A SLOWER SPEED COMPARED TO FASTER SPEED THE QUALITY BECOMES BETTER BY PROOF?
IF THIS FACT OR FICTION.
SOMEONE PLEASE PROVIDE SOME LONG YEARS EXPERIENCE PROOF.

Sorry, can't wait until someone clocks what I've said, 'cos I might be going out soon, so thought I'd write it up first...
The difference between the HHB and the Mac burner is... nothing much. The actual tray and laser workings are probably the same in both units. The extra dosh for the HHB covers the casing, functionality and the convertors - it's basically a hardware version of WaveBurner, and we all know hardware versions cost more than software versions.
Therefore, in my alleged test there should only be one of the four that shows any difference, and that's the real time recording via analogue. The other three, all remaining in the digital domain, irrespective of speed, should give the same results, because data is encoded in the same way, no matter how you do it. It would be interesting to see if there is any difference, but I doubt the equipment I've got would be sensitive enough to monitor it (or would allow me to zoom in and see the difference enough to post here). With that in mind, the human ear isn't going to hear it.
The only REAL difference the speed option gives you is reliability of burning. The faster you get, the more prone it is of making an error in the burning process, but this can sometimes come down to the quality of the disc itself. Not all discs are the same, as I guess most people have realised to their horror at some point (data).
Just a final note. I'm working with a voice-over artist for TV and radio, and the stations are happy to receive the files as MP3's via email. Who'd have thought that would happen when MP3 came out?!? Just goes to show people are putting a perspective on the quality standard for final use. But I'm still sending AIFF files though, MP3 makes me shudder as an original! And here we are worrying about CD quality...

Which has better export quality. imovie 11' or adobe premiere?

has anyone used both? which has better quality when you export it? I notice that imovie downgrades the quality when exporting by a LOT. It looks great inside imovie and looks terrible once exported!

Hi
I can only guess - (have no Premiere) but
Depends on what will be the end result. DVD or publish on YouTube etc. or saved on an USB-Memory to be Played on PlayStation 3 and alike.
If DVD - then most probably Adobe Premiere is better (if it can export interlaced video to iDVD) - iMovie'08 or 09 or 11 can not do this - they discard every second line resulting in a sever loss of quality.
I use
• iMovie HD6
• FinalCut any version
And they do deliver full quality over to iDVD
If other end results - then it most probably doesn't matter.
Yours Bengt W

Which yields a better quality slideshow?

Which yields better quality images?
If I "send" my slideshow from iPhoto to iDVD? Or if I start in iDVD and import a slideshow from iPhoto?

It's probably more a matter of personal preference than anything else. Allegedly, a track ripped at aac 128 sounds "better" than a 128 mp3. You should rip a track with which you are familiar in both formats (and perhaps at different bit rates) to see which you like the best.

I burned an edited movie to disc using H.264 codec and a second movie to MPEG -4 Video both worked well on my iMac but will not play on my Sony DVD Recorder/Player which accepts both DVD RW and DVD-RW. Any suggestions?

I burned an edited movie to disc using H.264 codec and a second movie using MPEG-4 Video. Both played well on my iMac but would not play on my Sony DVD Recorder/Player which accepts both DVD+RW and DVD-RW discs. I have tried other 'codecs' DV-PAL; DVCPRO-PAL; DVCPRO50-PAL; AIC; and finally share to iDVD. iDVD works on both my iMac and DVD Recorder but the picture is very poor with major shimmering which is unwatchable. Can anyone assist? The other codecs I used either do not pay on my video recorder or fail when I play them back on my iMac. I am at a loss as to what I can do. I am from the UK so using PAL is essential.

If the source video is interlaced, you may have problems using iMovie. It de-interlaces everything on output which can cause picture to look strange. Final Cut Pro X supports interlaced video, but it costs a lot more.
Standard DVD Players don't support H.264 or MPEG4. You might want to look at this article on transferring HD video to DVD. I wrote this article mainly for Final Cut Pro, but many of the same principles apply.

Elgato Video Capture to convert old VHS - H.264 or MPEG-4?

Elgato offers two different settings for capturing video...
Video resolution: 640×480 (4:3)
Video format: H.264 at 1.4 MBit/sec or MPEG-4 at 2.4 MBit/sec
Audio: AAC, 48kHZ, 128 kBit/sec
Which one of these would be best for importing into FCPX v10.1?
Thanks!

Thanks... that's what it looked like when I did a test import of some VHS footage using both settings. I opened them up in Quicktime and enlarged them and saw no noticeable difference between the two when comparing the exact same freeze frame. It seems MPEG-4 would be slightly better based on the extra 1 MBit/sec but I didn't see the difference it in the freeze frame.
At any rate, it's a pretty handy tool when connected to a VCR via S-Video and you have hundreds of VHS tapes to convert. I assume that when the video is captured by the Elgato it is doing a conversion that loses quality from the original and then FCP is transcoding it to when it gets imported for more quality loss but I guess that's unavoidable.
Appreciate the reply!

Mpeg - 4 videos won't play on ipod classic

I have several movies I've created in mpeg-4 and they won't copy to my iPod classic because it says the format isn't supported. Guess I don't understand since they are supposed to play on an iPod classic.

try to make sure that the bitrate and resolution is suitable for playing on iPod.
the general limits which the iPod carry.
H.264 video, up to 1.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per sec., Low-Complexity version of the H.264 Baseline Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48 kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats; H.264 video, up to 768 Kbps, 320 by 240 pixels, 30 frames per sec., Baseline Profile up to Level 1.3 with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48 kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats;
MPEG-4 video, up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per sec., Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48 kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats;
Try to lower the bitrate and resolution, maybe this will help.
if this still doesn't work, try another video to iPod video converter instead.
Windows XP

MPEG-4 Videos won't go on my ipod

so, I use videora to convert video files to mpeg-4 format so I can put them on my ipod...everything was working fine, but for some reason now quite a few of the video files, once they're in itunes and are in the mpeg-4 format, won't go on to my ipod...they work in itunes fine, but when I drag them to my ipod, they just don't register at all...any ideas??

try to make sure that the bitrate and resolution is suitable for playing on iPod.
the general limits which the iPod carry.
H.264 video, up to 1.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per sec., Low-Complexity version of the H.264 Baseline Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48 kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats; H.264 video, up to 768 Kbps, 320 by 240 pixels, 30 frames per sec., Baseline Profile up to Level 1.3 with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48 kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats;
MPEG-4 video, up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per sec., Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48 kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats;
Try to lower the bitrate and resolution, maybe this will help.
if this still doesn't work, try another video to iPod video converter instead.
Windows XP

H.264 vs. MPEG-4 video, which is better quality?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for