[Mp4-tech] Timing question

Dave Singer singer apple.com
Fri Jan 25 09:43:05 EST 2008


At 12:16  -0500 24/01/08, Nicolas El Hani wrote:
>Hello Dave,
>
>I've been referred to you by Gary Sullivan to ask you a question 
>regarding MP4 encoding in OS X. I am currently pushing for encoding 
>with h.264. I have two questions if you don't mind:
>
>(1) what difference if any is there in using a .mp4 container or a 
>.mov container?

There is no difference in question of what *can* be contained, but QT 
does expose a difference in the 'export options' for various reasons. 
This might be a good question to take to the quicktime mailing list 
at Apple, if you want to discuss it further.
>
>(2) Using Quicktime Pro or FCP, I cannot seem to access the "High" 
>profile, i.e. I only have the choice between baseline and main. What 
>application would recommend for me to encode in the "High" profile?

There are various products that do high profile, and without knowing 
a great deal more about your environment and needs, I wouldn't be 
able to recommend, and even then, I'd probably be hesitant.  Others 
on the list may have ideas, of course.
>
>Thank you so much. You can also reply to nicolasonline mac.com if 
>you want! Thanks again.
>
>Nicolas
>
>----------------------------------------
>>  From: garysull windows.microsoft.com
>>  To: nicolas505 hotmail.com; rramani gmail.com; mp4-tech lists.mpegif.org
>>  CC: singer apple.com
>>  Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2024 21:06:34 -0800
>>  Subject: RE: [Mp4-tech] Timing question
>>
>>
>>  I'm not sure you would really want to hear my advice about what to 
>>do with platform-specific Mac environment issues.   :-)
>>
>>  Maybe you should get that advice from Dave Singer, who is also on this list.
>>
>>  Best Regards,
>>
>>  Gary Sullivan
>>
>>  +> -----Original Message-----
>>  +> From: Nicolas El Hani [mailto:nicolas505 hotmail.com]
>>  +> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2024 8:47 PM
>>  +> To: Gary Sullivan; Ram; mp4-tech lists.mpegif.org
>>  +> Subject: RE: [Mp4-tech] Timing question
>>  +>
>>  +>
>>  +> Thank you so much, so basically it is a good idea to with
>>  +> anything else than baseline, and you really suggest me to go
>>  +> with "high" rather than "main". As I'm a Mac User and do a
>>  +> lot of my work on Final Cut and encode in Quicktime Pro, I
>>  +> have my two (last) questions hopefully!
>>  +>
>>  +> 1. Is there a difference between h.264 in a .mp4 container
>>  +> or a .mov container?
>>  +> 2. Quicktime Pro allows us to export only with the baseline
>>  +> or main profile, what program would you recommend for a Mac
>>  +> to be able to encode in the "high" profile?
>>  +>
>>  +> Thank you so so much for all your help!
>>  +>
>>  +> Nick
>>  +>
>>  +> ----------------------------------------
>>  +>> From: garysull windows.microsoft.com
>>  +>> To: nicolas505 hotmail.com; rramani gmail.com;
>>  +> mp4-tech lists.mpegif.org
>>  +>> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2024 14:29:14 -0800
>>  +>> Subject: RE: [Mp4-tech] Timing question
>>  +>> CC:
>>  +>>
>>  +>>
>>  +>> Re: "But if they are all encoded at the same bit rate, the
>>  +> quality, the actual perceived quality from all different
>>  +> profiles will be the same, it's just that the file size will
>>  +> be smaller (main will be smaller than baseline, high smaller
>>  +> than main)? But at the same data rate they will be the same
>>  +> quality? Thank you so much. I really appreciate it."
>>  +>>
>>  +>> No.  At the same bit rate, High is capable of providing
>>  +> better video quality than Main, and Main is capable of
>>  +> providing better video quality than Baseline (at least in
>>  +> the absence of data corruption/losses).
>>  +>>
>>  +>> Better compression capability can be used either way --
>>  +> either to provide lower bit rate for the same quality or to
>>  +> provide better quality at the same bit rate.
>>  +>>
>>  +>> Best Regards,
>>  +>>
>>  +>> Gary
>>  +>>
>>  +>> +> -----Original Message-----
>  > +>> +> From: Nicolas El Hani [mailto:nicolas505 hotmail.com]
>>  +>> +> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2024 2:16 PM
>>  +>> +> To: Gary Sullivan; Ram; mp4-tech lists.mpegif.org
>>  +>> +> Subject: RE: [Mp4-tech] Timing question
>  > +>> +>
>>  +>> +>
>>  +>> +> Hi Gary,
>>  +>> +>
>>  +>> +> Thanks so much for your prompt reply, what you said makes
>>  +>> +> complete sense, basically what you're saying is that the
>>  +>> +> only advantage of using main vs. baseline is that the
>>  +>> +> compression from main will be better, and the same with
>>  +>> +> "high" where compression of "high" will be better than main.
>>  +>> +> But if they are all encoded at the same bit rate, the
>>  +>> +> quality, the actual perceived quality from all different
>>  +>> +> profiles will be the same, it's just that the file size will
>>  +>> +> be smaller (main will be smaller than baseline, high smaller
>>  +>> +> than main)? But at the same data rate they will be the same
>>  +>> +> quality? Thank you so much. I really appreciate it.
>>  +>> +>
>>  +>> +> Nicolas
>>  +>> +>
>>  +>> +> ----------------------------------------
>>  +>> +>> From: garysull windows.microsoft.com
>>  +>> +>> To: nicolas505 hotmail.com; rramani gmail.com;
>>  +>> +> mp4-tech lists.mpegif.org
>>  +>> +>> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2024 12:35:47 -0800
>>  +>> +>> Subject: RE: [Mp4-tech] Timing question
>>  +>> +>> CC:
>>  +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> Nicolas El Hani et al,
>>  +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> I would strongly suggest to consider the High profile
>>  +>> +> rather than the Main profile.  These two profiles have
>>  +>> +> basically the same implementation complexity, but the High
>>  +>> +> profile has better compression capabilities.  The only
>>  +>> +> reason that the Main profile exists is that it was the best
>>  +>> +> we could come up with at the time (about a year before we
>>  +>> +> developed the High profile).
>>  +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> The High or Main profile would have substantially better
>>  +>> +> compression capability than the Baseline profile.  However,
>>  +>> +> they would require somewhat more computing resources to
>>  +>> +> implement than the Baseline profile, particularly when
>>  +>> +> considering implementation in software on general-purpose
>>  +>> +> processors.  This seems to be the primary reason that some
>>  +>> +> implementations (mobile devices, videoconferencing systems,
>>  +>> +> etc.) use the Baseline profile.  There are also some issues
>>  +>> +> relating to loss/error robustness capabilities (with
>>  +>> +> Baseline having some advantages over Main/High in that
>>  +>> +> regard), but my impression is that those features are
>>  +>> +> generally considered less important than the compression
>>  +>> +> capability and the computational resource requirements (in
>>  +>> +> fact, implementations of the Baseline profile often do not
>>  +>> +> actually take advantage of those enhanced loss/error
>>  +>> +> robustness features).
>>  +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> Best Regards,
>>  +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> Gary Sullivan
>>  +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +> -----Original Message-----
>>  +>> +>> +> From: Nicolas El Hani [mailto:nicolas505 hotmail.com]
>>  +>> +>> +> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2024 12:08 PM
>>  +>> +>> +> To: Gary Sullivan; Ram; mp4-tech lists.mpegif.org
>>  +>> +>> +> Subject: RE: [Mp4-tech] Timing question
>>  +>> +>> +>
>>  +>> +>> +>
>>  +>> +>> +> Hello Everyone,
>>  +>> +>> +>
>>  +>> +>> +> It's my first time on the mailing list, so excuse me if I'm
>>  +>> +>> +> emailing the wrong address or something is wrong in my
>>  +>> +>> +> etiquette, just let me know! I'm currently starting a
>>  +>> +>> +> business that involves video production. I have a basic
>>  +>> +>> +> fundamental question that maybe is not a very smart
>>  +>> +>> +> question, but basically is there inherently an advantage to
>>  +>> +>> +> encode a video in the "main" profile of h.264 over the
>>  +>> +>> +> "baseline" profile. I know the complexity of the main
>>  +>> +>> +> encoding is higher. So basically if you had the same file
>>  +>> +>> +> encoded in baseline and another one in main, with similar
>>  +>> +>> +> data rates (say 1500kbps) would the end result be the same?
>>  +>> +>> +> I'm going to be encoding video mostly in VGA resolution and
>  > +>> +>> +> start to drift towards 720p. The reason I ask is because
>>  +>> +>> +> final delivery to clients would be much better if the file
>>  +>> +>> +> could be viewed both on mobile devices (iphone, ipod,
>  > +>> +>> +> nokias, etc...) and locally on a computer or TV. But if
>>  +>> +>> +> encoding in baseline at the same resolution will compromise
>>  +>> +>> +> quality because of its macroblocks or algorithms at the
>>  +>> +>> +> encoding stage than it's worth it to use just main and if
>>  +>> +>> +> need be for mobile viewing deliver a second file in
>>  +>> +>> +> baseline. But it would really be much simpler and would
>>  +>> +>> +> streamline the business if baseline could hold up to the
>>  +>> +>> +> main. Thank you so much and I hope it's  not too much of a
>>  +>> +>> +> bother! Cheers.
>>  +>> +>> +>
>>  +>> +>> +> Nick
>>  +>> +>> +> ________________________________
>>  +>> +>> +>> From: garysull windows.microsoft.com
>>  +>> +>> +>> To: rramani gmail.com; mp4-tech lists.mpegif.org
>>  +>> +>> +>> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2024 11:03:02 -0800
>>  +>> +>> +>> Subject: RE: [Mp4-tech] Timing question
>>  +>> +>> +>> CC:
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> "Ram" et al,
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> It is not really true that "time resolution" is fixed to
>>  +>> +>> +> 30000 in H.263.   The standard uses a term called the
>>  +>> +>> +> "picture clock frequency".  The default PCF is 30000/1001.
>>  +>> +>> +> It is also possible to us a "custom PCF". A custom PCF is
>>  +>> +>> +> given by 1 800 000 / (clock divisor * clock conversion
>>  +>> +>> +> factor), where clock divisor can have values of 1 through
>>  +>> +>> +> 127 and clock conversion factor can either be 1000 or 1001.
>>  +>> +>> +> There was a very old version of the standard that did not
>>  +>> +>> +> support custom PCF, but that capability was added about
>>  +>> +> 10 years ago.
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> Also, PAL does not use 29.97 fps.  It is 25 fps.  NTSC is
>>  +>> +>> +> 30000/1001 fps (which is approximately, but not exactly,
>>  +>> +>> +> equal to 29.97 fps).
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> Best Regards,
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> Gary Sullivan
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> ________________________________
>>  +>> +>> +>> From: mp4-tech-bounces lists.mpegif.org
>>  +>> +>> +> [mailto:mp4-tech-bounces lists.mpegif.org] On Behalf Of Ram
>>  +>> +>> +>> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2024 7:30 AM
>>  +>> +>> +>> To: mp4-tech lists.mpegif.org
>>  +>> +>> +>> Subject: [Mp4-tech] Timing question
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> Hi Guys,
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> I primarily work with H263 and MPEG4 video codecs. In all
>>  +>> +>> +> video codecs thers is this parameters in the stream called
>>  +>> +>> +> Time resolution. In H263 they say it's fixed to 30000
>>  +>> +>> +>> so that they can achieve 29.97 fps which equals line
>>  +>> +>> +> frequencies used in PAL.
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> What is the best value to choose when someone transcodes
>>  +>> +>> +> between H263 and MPEG4 in either direction.
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> 'Thanks,
>>  +>> +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> +>> Ram
>>  +>> +>> +>
>>  +>> +>> +>
>>  +>> +>
>>  +> _________________________________________________________________
>>  +>> +>> +>
>>  +>> +>> +>
>>  +>> +>> +>
>>  +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> _______________________________________________
>>  +>> +>> NOTE: Please use clear subject lines for your posts.
>>  +>> +> Include [audio, [video], [systems], [general] or another
>>  +>> +> apppropriate identifier to indicate the type of
>>  +> question you have.
>>  +>> +>>
>>  +>> +>> Note: Conduct on the mailing list is subject to the
>>  +>> +> Antitrust guidelines found at
>>  +>> +> http://www.mpegif.org/public/documents/vault/mp-out-30042-Ant
>>  +>> +> itrust.php
>>  +>> +>
>>  +>> +>
>>  +> _________________________________________________________________
>>  +>> +>
>>  +>> +>
>>  +>> +>
>>  +>>
>>  +>> _______________________________________________
>>  +>> NOTE: Please use clear subject lines for your posts.
>>  +> Include [audio, [video], [systems], [general] or another
>>  +> apppropriate identifier to indicate the type of question you have.
>>  +>>
>>  +>> Note: Conduct on the mailing list is subject to the
>>  +> Antitrust guidelines found at
>  > +> http://www.mpegif.org/public/documents/vault/mp-out-30042-Ant
>>  +> itrust.php
>>  +>
>>  +> _________________________________________________________________
>>  +>
>>  +>
>>  +>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>NOTE: Please use clear subject lines for your posts. Include [audio, 
>[video], [systems], [general] or another apppropriate identifier to 
>indicate the type of question you have.
>
>Note: Conduct on the mailing list is subject to the Antitrust 
>guidelines found at 
>http://www.mpegif.org/public/documents/vault/mp-out-30042-Antitrust.php

-- 
David Singer
Apple/QuickTime


More information about the Mp4-tech mailing list