Now that I have access to a beta version of Cleaner 5.1, I started comparing the 2 most promising codecs for Quicktime; Sorenson 3 Pro and On2's VP3, which recently went open source. The beta Cleaner is needed to access Sorenson 3 Pro's dual pass VBR, to make this comparison an honest one.
With both codecs amazing results can be achieved at both high and low bandwidths. They compress fast so a quick turnaround can be realized. Finally Quicktime is once again on track with the competition, Real and Windows Media.
I tried both codecs with several different settings, using source material ranging from AE-rendered component, Digibeta, DV, to SVHS, and even material ripped from a DVD.
[[[[[ first impressions ]]]]]
Sorenson 3 benefits more from high quality source then VP3 does. VP3 is a bit more forgiving it seems...SVHS source is not very clean and Sorenson creates blockiness when it doesn't know how to handle a noisy moving section in the movie. VP3 will just blur the section a bit, hardly any artifacts visible.
Using high quality source, Sorenson really shines. it is better then VP3 because the colors are better preserved and are much more vivid. VP3 looks a bit like Windows Media or Real codecs, I always have the feeling a transparent white matte is overlayed, smearing some of the colors, and looking 'bleaker'. Still, both codecs are capable of creating full PAL, full 25 fps (I'm in Europe) framerate movies that are well below the 1mbit mark.
Using high bitrates, both codecs are processor-hungry and require fast CPU's for playback. I tested on a Pentium III 600 and a Mac G3 450. Both these machines had problems keeping the full framerate going. Scrolling in the movies is not smooth. Full screen playback is even worse. High end machines like a dual Pentium III 800 and a Mac G4 500 play the movies much better, but not many people own these machines at home.
If I need to target large audiences I would almost certainly limit fps to 12.5, or 15 with NTSC material, but I would try to keep the movie at full PAL...looks very impressive indeed. Material originating from low end source like VHS/SVHS or cheap DV I would treat the other way round, full fps but at 320/240.
It's time for some examples but I'm too busy to do that right now.
Discuss
