DonationCoder.com Software > Easy Screencast Recorder
LATEST VERSION INFO THREAD - Easy Screencast Recorder - v1.17.01 - May 31, 2017
mouser:
x264 in lossless mode sounds intriguing as a potential default recording format for ESR..
wraith808:
why x264 instead of other h.264 implementations? Just wondering...
(I think I found the answer on my own)
Vurbal:
x264 in lossless mode sounds intriguing as a potential default recording format for ESR..
-mouser (July 18, 2013, 09:22 AM)
--- End quote ---
That would be a tricky proposition. The problem is that it's not designed as a realtime encoder. There used to be a VfW version around but trust me VfW should be considered a last resort option and VfW x264 is a bad idea.
I do put up with VfW for CamStudio because it's better than any comparable program that doesn't cost hundreds of dollars. And because the CamStudio Lossless Codec is only available in VfW.
What you could do in theory is pipe the video to FFmpeg for encoding since x264 is integrated into it. I know FFmpeg supports pipe input but other than that I know basically nothing about it. I can see a lot of potential difficulties there like buffering.
Actually, though, that does make me think of a different option. I seem to recall that ffdshow can decode CamStudio Lossless using libavcodec so there's definitely FFmpeg support of some kind. That leads me to believe there's probably encoding support as well.
Well that's it. Now I'm on a mission to work this out. Damn you mouser! :P
mouser:
The problem is that it's not designed as a realtime encoder.
--- End quote ---
Fair enough.. And it probably makes sense to split up the job of rapid lossless recording vs the job of getting good compression.
So we're back to the idea that ESR should have a way to post-process (either on demand or automatically) video into a format for uploading and sharing.
Vurbal:
why x264 instead of other h.264 implementations? Just wondering...
(I think I found the answer on my own)
-wraith808 (July 18, 2013, 10:15 AM)
--- End quote ---
Yep, that's a good technical explanation. The less technical one is that x264 is not just free (as in beer and speech, but not necessarily patent encumbrance) but also the best H.264 encoder available with the exception of certain situations involving gradients where CinemaCraft's encoder is supposed to be the only good choice. I say supposed to be because it's a high end professional encoder that costs something like $50,000 so needless to say I haven't used it.
x264 is so good that The Criterion Collection paid the tens of thousands of dollars required for Blu-ray certification. If there's one thing Criterion is known for (besides their huge selection of art films) it's their uncompromising attitude to quality.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version