Dave, I tried transcoding the same episode to MPEG4 and it came out 40%
larger than the original MPEG2 transmission. I don't know why
anyone would use these methods if they want to keep their videos the
same dimensions as they are broadcast, since it looks like they
actually ballon in size instead of shrink. :( I guess if I was
scaling them down as well I'd see a size decrease but is it worth it?<br>
<br>
Both the 68% increase and 40% increase were seen using the default settings for both RTJPEG and MPEG4 screen settings.<br>
<br>
Are you using the default settings?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<span class="sg">
-Greg</span><br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/24/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">Dave Sherohman</b> <<a href="mailto:esper@sherohman.org">esper@sherohman.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
When I first set up transcoding, I went with RTjpeg since it was the<br>default and I saw no significant change in the size of my programs -<br>about 2.1G/hour before and 1.9G/hour after. Then I tried mpeg4 and<br>(with the default settings) that got me 750-800M/hour. So I'd say
<br>that, if the quality is acceptable to you, mpeg4 definitely looks<br>like the way to go.<br>
</blockquote></div><br>