The new iPod Nano, Classic and Touch
Forum rules
An Activity Log is required for support requests. Please read How-to get an activity log? for details on how and why this should be provided.
An Activity Log is required for support requests. Please read How-to get an activity log? for details on how and why this should be provided.
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:25 pm
The new iPod Nano, Classic and Touch
What is the best setting to encode movies for these devices ?
-
- Veteran User
- Posts: 680
- Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 12:36 pm
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:25 pm
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:25 pm
No. They aren't. Still no b-frames, still no cabac, and that's just to start. The only thing that's changed is the capability of storing much greater sized video, in both bitrate and resolution. The quality itself hasn't changed because Apple still isn't using hardware capable of using h.264's strengths.pizzaspecial wrote:The new iPods are capable of much greater video quality
Sure, if you have a Classic, maybe use a higher bitrate to waste all that storage space -- though with the PSNRs and average frame QPs the iPod presets already reach, you won't be able to see much difference on a 320*240 screen. If you're watching a lot of video on a tv rather than the iPod screen, maybe use a 720 width.
But arguing that the current presets aren't suited to the new iPods is absurd. Get back to me when the iTunes store videos get an upgrade.
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:25 pm
The iPod doesn't have a 42" 720p screen, now does it? That's why it's wasted space. I don't know what you're trying to refute here, since in my last post I said "If you're watching a lot of video on a tv rather than the iPod screen, maybe use a 720 width."pizzaspecial wrote:720 by xxx at 2500 kbps looks better than 640 by xxx at 2500 kbps on my 42 inch 720p panasonic
I don't see how that is wasted space
You're ignoring my main point, which is that the new iPods are *not* capable of any different video quality than the last gen iPods. They use the same [Censored] h.264 settings. Improved quality would mean it'd look better at the *same* bitrate and resolution.
You are saying the new iPod line can output true 16:9 widescreen? (In other words, if you watch 640xX content and 720xX content in wide mode without zoom, the 720xX one is visually wider on-screen?)pizzaspecial wrote:720 by xxx at 2500 kbps looks better than 640 by xxx at 2500 kbps on my 42 inch 720p panasonic
Rodney
The new iPods don't just have support for 640x480 with the baseline low-complexity profile, though. They have support for the baseline profile up to level 3.0 at 640x480 (and is H.264 on the new iPods still hardlocked at a max 640 width?), which, if I'm not mistaken, yields higher quality at the same bitrate. If so, then the new iPods DO support higher quality video than the older models. Can someone confirm this?
Last edited by Durendal on Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Um, ipods have supported baseline profile level 3.0 for a long time. We have used baseline in level 3.0 for HB since the mediafork release.Durendal wrote:The new iPods don't just have support for 640x480 with the baseline low-complexity profile, though. They have support for the baseline profile up to level 3.0, which, if I'm not mistaken, yields higher quality at the same bitrate. If so, then the new iPods DO support higher quality video than the older models. Can someone confirm this?
Last version of of HB to use level 1.3 was HB 0.7.1 as I recall.
I thought that it only supported 1.3 at up to 320x240 in the initial release before 640x480 with the LC profile was released. I saw no mention of any levels on the iPod specs at 640x480, just baseline LC. Maybe I'm mixed up on the whole thing.dynaflash wrote: Um, ipods have supported baseline profile level 3.0 for a long time. We have used baseline in level 3.0 for HB since the mediafork release.
Last version of of HB to use level 1.3 was HB 0.7.1 as I recall.
Well, this is from Handbrake svn rev 70 which was from 9/30/06 which was the first commit after titer went on hiatus. It is the code that the MacGui uses to tell libhb what level to set for the iPod. So everyone has been running baseline level 3.0 for HandBrake iPod encodes since then whether you have known it or notDurendal wrote:I thought that it only supported 1.3 at up to 320x240 in the initial release before 640x480 with the LC profile was released. I saw no mention of any levels on the iPod specs at 640x480, just baseline LC. Maybe I'm mixed up on the whole thing.dynaflash wrote: Um, ipods have supported baseline profile level 3.0 for a long time. We have used baseline in level 3.0 for HB since the mediafork release.
Last version of of HB to use level 1.3 was HB 0.7.1 as I recall.
Code: Select all
/* Baseline Level 3.0
For iPods w/ fimware 1.2 */
job->h264_level = 30;
job->mux = HB_MUX_IPOD;
Low Complexity is an apple coined term, just means "without some of the cool stuff the standard offers" or something like that.Durendal wrote:Well, I'll be darned. Looks like Apple simply didn't document it, but it worked anyway, unless 3.0 is encompassed by the whole baseline LC profile. Is baseline LC just a more broad category encompassing numerous encoding schemes?
Apple did document it. That is what made us change it and actually was the catalyst for rhester resurrecting HandBrake