5 out of 5 members like this post.
Interesting comparison of formats. Thank you for sharing and welcome. Its important to keep in mind that not all MPEG2 encoders are created equal. That analysis may not play out as consistently as you might think when comparing across various encoders. It is a bit of a running joke among technical geeks that there are open source encoders capable of doing a better MPEG2 encode than what the studios usually produce with their fancy proprietary encoders. Compare the DVD of my Matrix edit against the official studio DVD. You may find the comparison to be shocking.
Originally Posted by mz23
Certainly the various MPEG4 codecs produce smaller file sizes than MPEG2. They produce smaller file sizes by a significant amount actually. H.264 is something like 40% more efficient than MPEG2. The comparable quality is also undoubtedly a bit better. The problem though is that even if I agree with all that, it doesn't take away from a great many reasons to work with DVD. It is relatively easy to work with. It has universal compatibility. There are no creativity limitations for menus, extras, subtitles, alternate tracks, etc. The format feels more tangible and fun because you can print out artwork, stick it in a case, and put it on a bookshelf. You can play it in a kick-ass home theater or on your computer.
I love HD but am only interested in working in the physical media BD and DVD formats. To hell with the rest. People can strip my edit down and rip it to whatever format they want on their own time, but I am not going to do it for them. I do this to make fun collectible rarities for movie fans; not to provide a free throw-away rental service for Internet geeks.
2 out of 2 members like this post.
Hai. I can has fanedit?
Originally Posted by geminigod
Go then, there are other worlds than these.
2 out of 2 members like this post.
First, welcome to the site!
A few things that reinforce what has been stated already and might help further understand the mentality that produces the final edits which become available.
- An old forum member once created a wonderful set of unofficial fanediting rules, #1 of which was "Edit for yourself". As such, I would say the majority of editors around here seek to produce something that they can put on their shelf. A good fanedit typically takes a lot of work, and speaking for myself, if I'm going to put it out there for other fans of fanediting I only want to release it in the full version that I see I worked so hard to do, which includes things like menus, commentaries, special features etc.. I edit for myself, and then share that with those who might be interested.
- encoding is never a simple apples and apples comparison, as Gem put so eloquently. I'll not re-hash his comments, but add that not all editing programs/platforms handle codecs and containers the same way. Being an editor on the mac platform using FCP7, mpeg-2 is the way to go, and I'll put the comparative quality against the original source quite happily any day of the week. Filesize and ease of someone else's download is no my primary concern.
- Faneditors are responsible for making their edits available, not the site. There is no formal requirement of how faneditors make their edits available. Collectively we make due the best we can given distribution means at our disposal, so various file-lockers, usenet etc. Every editor has their own path to follow here. We try to make it as easy as possible, but we also have to stick within what is sustainable and realistic.
You seem a nice enough fellow and certainly interested in fanediting and quality so again welcome and we look forward to your contributions to the forum discussions