Hey guys,
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Mike Melanson wrote:
> What's the minimum level of quality an encoder should meet in order to be
> included in the codebase? 2 items:
>
> 1) I wrote an Apple Graphics/SMC video encoder that operates on a lossless
> principle rather than attempting to mak
Mike Melanson skrev 2011-07-23 00:50:
2) There's a usable Cinepak encoder patch out there. It's chatty but it
does the job. I don't know about the overall quality but given the vintage
of the codec, the encoder is probably doing a good job. Should we push it
in?
I just figured out that the auth
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 03:43:45PM -0700, Mike Melanson wrote:
> What's the minimum level of quality an encoder should meet in order to be
> included in the codebase? 2 items:
>
> 1) I wrote an Apple Graphics/SMC video encoder that operates on a lossless
> principle rather than attempting to make
> 2) There's a usable Cinepak encoder patch out there. It's chatty but it
> does the job. I don't know about the overall quality but given the vintage
> of the codec, the encoder is probably doing a good job. Should we push it
> in?
I just figured out that the author of this patch is on the list.
What's the minimum level of quality an encoder should meet in order to be
included in the codebase? 2 items:
1) I wrote an Apple Graphics/SMC video encoder that operates on a lossless
principle rather than attempting to make any R/D decisions during vector
quantization. Should I bother submitting