<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 6:40 AM, Roberto Ragusa <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mail@robertoragusa.it" target="_blank">mail@robertoragusa.it</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div id=":1e6">Ok, so you convert to intermediate MPEG2 to avoid issues with keyframes and cutting<br>
which are specific to the formats involved.<br>
Then you decide to routinely use MPEG2 for this.<br>
And you use high quality settings to minimize unavoidable re-encoding artifacts.<br></div></blockquote><div><br>Yes.<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div id=":1e6">
What I was objecting is "I go intermediate to avoid artifacts", which can't be true and<br>
it looked like you were saying that, originally.</div></blockquote><div><br>Of course, if you have ALL your videos in the same codec, fps rate, resolution, etc, then there is no problem using whatever video editor you choose, to cut and concatenate vids at will. The problem arises when you have different videos, from different sources using different codecs and framerates, and want to created a single remixed video out of ´em.<br>
<br>That´s when, in my experience, it works best to convert all source material to very high quality MPEG2 (in my case, and for my needs, if it´s not HD material, DVD-quality framerate MPEG2 works best- I use the ´DVD´ presets for FFMPEG that come with WinFF), do the editing, and get the final result in MPEG2.<br>
<br>Then, as needed, one can re-encode from that final video into lower-size files, with more efficient formats and bitrates according to the target destination (e-mail attachment, web site embedding, etc).<br><br>Of course, raw uncompressed video works best, but I usually don´t have the HD space on my Atom netbook to justify that.<br>
<br>I use the above approach when remixing vids from Youtube, and other web sources which often come in mp4, flv or avi. I got sick of different video editors chocking on input vids codecs or whatever, or producing unpredictable results. It seems to me that the MPEG2 codec is simple and understood enough as to not cause any problems with even the oldest of video editors.<br>
</div></div><br>Editing flv, avi (xvid/divx), and h.264, is more troublesome.<br><br>Just my $0.02<br>FC<br><br>