Homepage
search
ProductsShopNewsSupportCompany
English
Products

Contact
SheerVideo
PhotoJazz
Synchromy

SheerVideo

Testimonials
Speed
Power
Fidelity
Versatility
FAQ
Test Data

FAQ

Introduction
Uses
Speed
Power
Fidelity
Formats
Availability

Uses

Productivity
Processing
Genres
Other Perfect-Fidelity Codecs
Approximating Codecs


BitJazz
SheerVideo FAQ
Uses: Other Perfect-Fidelity Codecs

Is SheerVideo useful for the Animation codec?

Is SheerVideo useful for the Component Video codec?

Is SheerVideo useful for the Microcosm codec?

Is SheerVideo useful for the None codec?

Is SheerVideo useful for the PNG codec?

Is SheerVideo useful for the PhotoJazz codec?

Is SheerVideo useful for uncompressed codecs?

SheerVideoIs SheerVideo useful for uncompressed codecs?

Absolutely. SheerVideo is designed as a superior replacement for uncompressed codecs. Whether RGB or Y'CbCr, 4:2:2 or 4:4:4[:4], progressive or interlaced, SD or HD or arbitrary resolution, NTSC or PAL/SECAM, 4:3 or 16:9 or arbitrary frame aspect ratio, SheerVideo offers, on average, a 60% savings in time, space, and bandwidth.

top | next

SheerVideoIs SheerVideo useful for the None codec?

Yes, SheerVideo is designed as a superior replacement for the RGB[A] 8b format of Apple's None codec, also known as 'raw '. SheerVideo directly supports the highest-precision RGB[A] 8b pixel format used by None, corresponding to Millions of Colors and Millions of Colors+. But SheerVideo takes only half the storage space and half the bandwidth to transmit. And in most situations, SheerVideo is twice as fast as None, because it overcomes storage and transmission bottlenecks.

On the other hand, SheerVideo does not directly support the low-precision pixel formats supported by None.

previous | top | next

SheerVideoIs SheerVideo useful for the Component Video codec?

Absolutely. SheerVideo is designed as a superior replacement for Apple's Component Video codec. SheerVideo directly supports the wide-range Y'CbCr 8bw 4:2:2 pixel format (also known as 'yuv2' or 'yuvu') used by Component Video. But SheerVideo only takes half as much storage space and half as big a bandwidth to transmit. And in most situations, SheerVideo is twice as fast as Component Video, because it overcomes storage and transmission bottlenecks. Moreover, unlike the Component Video codec, SheerVideo also directly supports other popular component video formats, such as 601-compliant video-range Y'CbCr 8bv 4:2:2 and Y'CbCr[A] 8bv 4:4:4[:4], and even RGB[A] 8b.

previous | top | next

SheerVideoIs SheerVideo useful for the Microcosm codec?

Yes. If time is more valuable to you than space, then SheerVideo is a heaven-sent replacement for Microcosm, since SheerVideo encodes 70 times faster (110 MiB/s on a 1-processor 1 GHz Mac G4) than Digital Anarchy's Microcosm codec (1.5 MiB/s), and SheerVideo decodes 15 times faster (100 versus 6.3 MiB/s). Yet for real-world footage, SheerVideo is only 3% less powerful (2.20 versus 2.27). And unlike Microcosm, SheerVideo also supports native video formats as well as RGB[A], although Microcosm also supports 16-bit channels.

On the other hand, for poster-quality content, Microcosm tends to have much higher compression power. If you need this extra power, then SheerVideo can serve as a faster and slimmer input format for Microcosm, which is especially useful if you're trying out multiple parameter settings in Microcosm to see what yields the highest compression.

previous | top | next

SheerVideoIs SheerVideo useful for the PNG codec?

Probably. If you're using PNG for real-world RGB 8b content, then SheerVideo is the perfect substitute. Not only does SheerVideo encode 60 times faster (110 versus 1.8 MiB/s on a 1-processor 1 GHz Mac G4) and decode 5 times faster (100 versus 18 MiB/s) than Apple's excellent implementation of PNG, and SheerVideo decodes 15 times faster (100 versus 6.3 MiB/s). SheerVideo is also 20% more powerful (2.20 versus 1.80) for real-world footage. And unlike PNG, SheerVideo also supports native video formats as well as RGB[A]. although PNG also supports 16-bit channels.

On the other hand, for poster-quality imagery, PNG generally has much higher compression power, for which PNG also supports low-precision color modes. So if you need PNG to compress poster-quality content, then SheerVideo can serve as a faster and slimmer input format for PNG, which is particularly useful if you're experimenting with different parameter settings in PNG to get the highest compression.

previous | top | next

SheerVideoIs SheerVideo useful for the PhotoJazz codec?

Maybe. If you're using PhotoJazz for real-world RGB[A] 8b data, and if time is a much more valuable criterion for you than space, then SheerVideo is unquestionably a superior substitute for PhotoJazz, since SheerVideo encodes and decodes 50 times faster (110 MiB/s on a 1-processor 1 GHz Mac G4) than BitJazz's PhotoJazz codec (1.9 MiB/s). And unlike PhotoJazz, SheerVideo also supports native video formats as well as RGB[A], although PhotoJazz also supports 16-bit channels and many other print-oriented formats and features.

On the other hand, for poster-quality content, PhotoJazz tends to have much higher compression power, and even for real-world footage, PhotoJazz is 11% more powerful (2.47 versus 2.20) than SheerVideo. If this extra power is important, then SheerVideo can serve as a faster and slimmer input format for PhotoJazz.

previous | top | next

SheerVideoIs SheerVideo useful for the Animation codec?

Maybe. If you are using Apple's Animation codec for the traditional low-detail constant-shaded 2-dimensional content it was designed for, you will probably find it to be the best choice, since it compresses such material with much higher power than SheerVideo. And Animation directly supports low-precision color formats that are ideal for such material.

However, if you're using the Animation codec to compress naturalistic, high-detail animation, especially 3-dimensional animation such as Pixar's, or if you're using the Animation codec for live-action footage just because it was the only codec fast enough to be worthwhile, you will find that SheerVideo is the best choice. SheerVideo not only compresses such material 100% more powerfully than the Animation codec, SheerVideo also compresses 140% faster (110 versus 43 MiB/s on a single-CPU 1 GHz Mac G4) than Animation. Within RAM, SheerVideo decompresses 30% slower (100 versus 145 MiB/s) than Animation, but for real-world content, SheerVideo ends up being much faster in practice, because Animation compresses it so little that it gets stuck in disk retrieval bottlenecks. Note also that SheerVideo supports both RGB[A] 8b formats, for film animation, and Y'CbCr[A] 8b 4:4:4[:4] and 4:2:2 formats, for television and direct-to-video animation.

previous | top


previous pagenext page

Copyright © 2003..2011 BitJazz Inc. All rights reserved.
Site design by BitJazz Inc.