On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, David Strozzi wrote:
> BUT...
>
> quicktime pro isn't free, it only exists on macs, and not everyone can
> play .mov's.
Wow, that's a good trick - getting 2.5 out of 3 things incorrect
in a single sentence :)
True, QT-Pro is not free (like the non-Pro QT Player - which is free).
But you do NOT need QT-Pro to *play* movies. The PRO version is
only required for the creation. Once the QT file is created ANY
QT Player can *play* it.
It is not only for MACS. QT exists for Windows and the price is the
same as for Macs: free
Everyone can play .mov files - either they download QT Player (NOT the
pro version unless they want to edit the movie you send them ;)) or
have MPlayer. That takes care of Macs, windoze systems, and linux/bsd
systems. Well, ok - maybe not "everyone" but close enough ;)
> So my more basic question is, of the 'standard' movie file formats,
> which I guess are AVI, MOV, and MPEG, can any of them function as
> 'containers' for jpegs or pngs or bitmaps? Where they don't try to do
Why not create a MPEG-1 file? If you're coming from progressive
photos or computer generated imagery MPEG-1 would be a good match -
it is NOT as some folks think limited to those 320x240 webvideo
framesize. Forget the exact limit, but I think it's 4096x4096 for
MPEG-1. MPEG-1 has no license fees, etc so support for it is
quite widespread (it's something even windoze can play without special
consideration as I recall).
Or MPEG-4/H.264 inside a QT file would work too.
For "TV" viewing or similar a slidehow on DVD would be a good method
too - but that's just 720x480 or so.
Or a DVD-HD using H.264 perhaps, but support for authoring that is
not widespread and player software even less so.
Cheers,
Steven Schultz
_______________________________________________
Mjpeg-users mailing list
Mjpeg-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
