Why do people rar videos?

This is a discussion on Why do people rar videos? within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Oh, it's MPEG4 alright. DivX to be exact. It's also MPEG4 and an AVI container. Let's see how it fares ...

  1. #31
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,820
    Oh, it's MPEG4 alright. DivX to be exact. It's also MPEG4 and an AVI container.
    Let's see how it fares against MPEG4 AVC, shall we?

    UPDATE:
    And the results are in. RAR: 150 MB vs 150 MB.
    7zip: 152 MB vs 150 MB.
    I can instruct how to recompress and verify these results, if you want.
    But it goes to show that compressing a video using good video compressing yields in little or no saved space.
    Last edited by Elysia; 02-12-2008 at 12:24 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  2. #32
    Ethernal Noob
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,901
    weird random 600mb videos...
    sure buddy.

  3. #33
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    except again, you are choosing specific examples, whereas I have also shown examples that show excellent compression adn are also Mpeg4. Your claim is that they compress little or not at all, where I have shown that not to be the case. I can show you just as many examples where Mpeg4 does compress as you can show that it does not. You are taking a few specific examples where the Mpeg4 was highly compressed to begin with and makign a broad sweepign statement that those examples are representative of MPEG4 as a whole. I have shown that they are not.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  4. #34
    pwns nooblars
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Portland, Or
    Posts
    1,094
    Or one could turn the tables on you and say you are hand picking your videos to be not compressed much, so that it would show you to be correct. Fact of the matter is, most times people share media across the net, especially audio and video, it is compressed to the point that using a standard file compression program is frivolous. Take anime for example, I have about 150gigs of anime, and about 150 gigs of that wont compress worth a damn if I ran it through 7zip, RAR, or what ever compression software you want to use.

  5. #35
    Captain Crash brewbuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    7,251
    It's funny watching you guys argue about this... Kind of like choosing which color of racing stripe to put on your Civic. If reducing the size of a file by a few percent makes you feel like a badass I guess that's cool.

  6. #36
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,820
    Quote Originally Posted by abachler View Post
    except again, you are choosing specific examples, whereas I have also shown examples that show excellent compression adn are also Mpeg4. Your claim is that they compress little or not at all, where I have shown that not to be the case. I can show you just as many examples where Mpeg4 does compress as you can show that it does not. You are taking a few specific examples where the Mpeg4 was highly compressed to begin with and makign a broad sweepign statement that those examples are representative of MPEG4 as a whole. I have shown that they are not.
    I've chosen files that represent about 90% of the material on internet. Every video you come across, except really old ones, uses either Xvid, DivX or H264, usually x264.
    MPEG4 ASP compresses about 2-3% and H264 pretty much none.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  7. #37
    Captain Crash brewbuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    7,251
    Quote Originally Posted by abachler View Post
    except again, you are choosing specific examples, whereas I have also shown examples that show excellent compression adn are also Mpeg4. Your claim is that they compress little or not at all, where I have shown that not to be the case. I can show you just as many examples where Mpeg4 does compress as you can show that it does not. You are taking a few specific examples where the Mpeg4 was highly compressed to begin with and makign a broad sweepign statement that those examples are representative of MPEG4 as a whole. I have shown that they are not.
    How is Elysia's limited and probably unrepresentative sample any different than your limited and unrepresentative sample? If this is really a question you are interested in answering (I'm not), you ought to download a few hundred randomly chosen video files and do a real test. The problem is the "randomly chosen" part. As far as I know there is no method of randomly sampling a video from the Internet with no statistical bias. And how would you weight your sampling distribution? By file size? Uniformly? By number of downloads per day?

    Regardless of whether RAR can actually make the file smaller, it still requires me to have a RAR dearchiver as well as extra disk space in order to decompress the file. A few extra bytes of file size is a small price to pay to not have to deal with that pain in the butt.

  8. #38
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    You have to have some kind of dearchiver to begin with, so that complaint is mute. It is common practive to compress files for distribution. Once you have spent the time to compress the file there is no good reason not to distribute the smaller of compressed/uncompressed. The situation where you do not have enough disk space to decompress the file is rare. I would hazard that 99.9% of users have plenty of extra space to decrompress. If you are that low on disk space then perhaps the real issue is why you havent upgraded to a larger HDD.

    Decompressing a RAR is just like opening a folder. WinRAR doesnt fully decompress the entire image, just the directory, so you can see whats there before decompressing it. I realyl don't see how that is any more of a pain in the butt than using an uncompressed file. Particularly if you are so low on disk space as you claim to be, you shoudl be keeping all yoru files in compressed archives and only decompressing the ones you need to use.

    As for the limitation in the samples, its simple. She claims that A cannot B because C. I show an example D where A can B. Therefor her argument that A cannot B is false by counterexample regardless of how unrepresentative C and D are.
    Last edited by abachler; 02-12-2008 at 10:29 AM.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  9. #39
    C++ Witch laserlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    21,986
    It is common practive to compress files for distribution.
    I think Wraithan already addressed this point: "In most cases, people have already compressed the video before it is RAR'd/7zip'd/ZIP'd so the effects of a second compression is negligable, the point of the OP was that no type of compression is much better than typical video compression."

    An anology for (open source) software would be compressing a compressed tarball.
    C + C++ Compiler: MinGW port of GCC
    Version Control System: Bazaar

    Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

  10. #40
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,820
    Quote Originally Posted by abachler View Post
    As for the limitation in the samples, its simple. She claims that A cannot B because C. I show an example D where A can B. Therefor her argument that A cannot B is false by counterexample regardless of how unrepresentative C and D are.
    So what are implying is that my test case is pretty irrelevant simply because there are other compressions out there can be far better compressed?
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  11. #41
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    So what are implying is that my test case is pretty irrelevant simply because there are other compressions out there can be far better compressed?
    Not irrelevant, just not deterministic.

    The reason that it is common practice to compress files before distro is that they usually DO compress and once the processing time has been spent to compress them, even a small savings in size makes it better to distribute the compressed version. So essentially the cost to use the compressed versus uncompressed is zero and any savings in bandwidth is free. I'm not saying that MPEG4 cannot achieve good compression, I am saying that for a lot of reasons it is usually not the case that mpeg4 files are compressed at their highest settings and that RAR can usually achieve some improvement. This improvement can range from 2% in elysia's example to 33% or more as in my example. I figure that '10% on average' is a good rule of thumb then.
    Last edited by abachler; 02-12-2008 at 11:05 AM.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  12. #42
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,820
    Yes, of course, but a few kilobytes saving is nothing. It all depends on the compression used, because video compression is far better at saving size than compression utilities. And as shown, with H264 and very high compression settings, compressing it using winrar saves nothing. It's just a waste of time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  13. #43
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    As I stated, video is not always compressed using the highest settigns for various reasons of quality/speed. Therefor it is prudent to at least TRY to compress the video first. Once the RAR ( or zip etc) compression has been performed, there is no reason not to use the smaller of the compressed or uncompressed versions. 2% may not seem like much, but its enough to save on the upload time which is realyl what most distributers are worried about.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  14. #44
    CSharpener vart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Rishon LeZion, Israel
    Posts
    6,484
    Also - if archive is password protected - it will NOT be scanned by the Antivirus software on server and on Firewall, saving the CPU/HDD access times on server
    The first 90% of a project takes 90% of the time,
    the last 10% takes the other 90% of the time.

  15. #45
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,820
    Quote Originally Posted by abachler View Post
    As I stated, video is not always compressed using the highest settigns for various reasons of quality/speed. Therefor it is prudent to at least TRY to compress the video first. Once the RAR ( or zip etc) compression has been performed, there is no reason not to use the smaller of the compressed or uncompressed versions. 2% may not seem like much, but its enough to save on the upload time which is realyl what most distributers are worried about.
    For quality reasons? The only argument against heavy video compression is decoding speed and encoding time.
    Still, if you encode using MPEG4 ASP/AVC, it's hardly worth the time compressing it. For other sources, perhaps... but 90% of the material is MPEG4 ASP/AVC.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Some people
    By Cgawd in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-27-2002, 04:15 PM
  2. I'm worried about some of the people wanting to program...
    By damonbrinkley in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-23-2002, 06:38 AM
  3. Dos Rar Extractor
    By (TNT) in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-11-2002, 10:50 AM
  4. Religious Bull****
    By Witch_King in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: 10-23-2001, 07:14 AM
  5. IT people - weird genius or simply narrow-minded, antisocial, lazy people
    By Carlos in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-11-2001, 05:00 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21