-R0 is the one that seems to trigger it. The file size turns out being about 15% smaller than with '-R 2', but the quality drops really bad.
I'm hoping to put a 1-second or so clip up soon that exhibits the problem. -- Ray On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:20:14 +0100 > HI! > > Ray Cole wrote: > > I was able to confirm it is the default of '-R 0' that was causing poor quality. > > If I use '-R 0' on 1.6.1.92 I get the same flood of artifacts that I get with > > 1.6.1.93. > > I have also some strange artifacts with .93 (although I don't know about > .92). What -R setting should I use to see, if -R is the cause? > > Thomas > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 > Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration > See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. > http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn > _______________________________________________ > Mjpeg-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Mjpeg-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
