[whatwg] H.264-in-<video> vs plugin APIs
silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com
Sat Jun 13 18:48:52 PDT 2009
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Chris DiBona<cdibona at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Chris DiBona<cdibona at gmail.com> wrote:
>> to YouTube! I used it as an example of converting content at scale,
>> to speak to the relative impact of a codec change vs. API changes in
>> terms of effort.
>> I don't think the bandwidth delta is very much with recent (and
>> format-compatible) improvements to the Theora encoders, if it's even
>> in H.264's favour any more, but I'd rather get data than share
>> suppositions. Can you send me a link to raw video for the clip at
>> http://www.youtube.com/demo/google_main.mp4?2 so I can get it
>> converted with the state of the art encoder and we can compare
> I'll see if I can get the numbers/video for you on that (and I'll do
> it off list, for th sake of the whatwg mailing list :-) . The trick is
> starting from the raw upload.
I think it would actually be advantageous to have this data shared on
an open list, rather than continuing to have the myth be distributed
without hard data.
FWIW: all the files that I encoded from raw data to both, flv (with
H.264) and to ogv (with Theora) turned out to be of similar size - if
not even smaller in Theora. This assumes the same image resolution,
the same frame rate, and the same audio sampling rate.
Please, make these numbers available publicly, even if you prefer not
to send it to this mailing list.
More information about the whatwg