On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 10:16:18AM -0800, Trent Piepho wrote: > > If you just want a PVR, then why not keep the recording in mjpeg form?
Several reasons... > Sure > it takes up more space then mpeg2, Way more! > but what costs more, a 100GB+ ide drive or > a hardware mpeg2 compression card? At the difference in space usage, disk. I have a 5:27s clip here that I was testing with. It is 720x480, default lavrec jpeg quality (50% I think it is isn't it?). It is 917MB in size. I converted it to MPEG2 @ 4500kb/s video, 128kb/s audio and it reduced to 187MB. That's less than 1/5th the size and the quality is much more than I need. Keeping a couple of dozen MJPEGs around would just not be feasible. > Of course hardware mpeg for linux isn't > possible at this time anyway, Have you seen any of the discussion recently about the PVR 250? > but large harddrives work fine, so it's not like > that's even a real choice. Hard drives are not large enough. at 12 GB/h, if I wanted to keep 24 hours of MJPEGs, I would need 288GB. At C$2.50/G, that's C$720. I can get a PVR 250 for about C$250. > I haven't been following the thread that closely, but have you tried mpeg2enc > without using any scaling or de-noising? I have not tried any of those. I am doing a straight $ lav2yuv | mpeg2enc > Those steps are very cpu intensive > and if you're not looking for quality... And mpeg2enc is intensive enough on it's own. b. -- Brian J. Murrell
msg00173/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
