I am left dumbfounded. I did some visual quality benchmarks using ffmpeg2theora, and in every case, theora 1.0 *DESTROYED* theora 1.1 in terms of resulting quality. Something is going way wrong here, and I don't know what it is.
I have outputted the results of my benchmarks here for you to see: http://jeff.ecchi.ca/public/theora/ My methodology: - run ffmpeg2theora 0.23 (with the libtheora0 1.0 package also installed) on various settings - run it again with the same settings, but with ffmpeg2theora 0.25 and libtheora0 1.1 - compare the look of the image Results: with the default settings (quality 5), there is no visible difference. But as soon as you get a bit more aggressive by lowering the quality setting to 1 or by using a bitrate encoding method at 1000 or 500 kbps, the results with theora 1.1 are *horrible* compared to what theora 1.0 produces. Example commands I used: ffmpeg2theora -v 1 --optimize MVI_0442.MOV ffmpeg2theora -V 500 --optimize MVI_0442.MOV Disclaimer: the source clip (MVI_0442.MOV) is sample footage shot by Eugenia for her Canon SX200 IS review on OSNews. I used it simply because it was the best quality clip I had around for doing benchmarks on aesthetics. I would be glad to be proven wrong, because I still haven't found a way to make theora thusnelda live to the expectations. Among the things I noticed is that the newer ffmpeg2theora/theora produces smaller files *even though I specified the bitrate*, which makes no sense to me, and could explain *part* of the phenomenon. I would be glad to have a *reliable* way of testing. -- Please sync libtheora 1.1.0-1 from debian (unstable) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/436726 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
