Umm well, it's really big, 77 MB.
Don't have a hosting so I'll need to choose one first and upload... and that's... slow >_<
Anyhow, why not try some heavy compression files yourself?
No offence Mario, but your word doesn't carry a lot of weight with me. Im certainly willing to go through the trouble of verifying her results, but since I posted the files I used, I expect the same courtesy in return.
Not really sure, I have a hosting service that I use, but it doesnt allow anonymous ftp upload. Perhaps you could just find some suitable source already on the net that we could compare results from. I suggest Globat.com if you are looking to get a host. Im switchign to them when my current contract runs out.
You could always use Megaupload:
(Though it's over HTTP.)
EDIT: FWIW, I rar:ed a couple of .avi files, the rar's were both 10-15% smaller (with max compression). I could upload them for verification, if requested.
Last edited by Oysterman; 02-11-2008 at 03:10 PM.
I'm not looking for a host right now. I had one that gave 10 or 100 or so webspace, I can't remember, but I let it expire since I just had nothing to put on the hosting.
So, some source of the web, huh? Speedruns maybe?
I'll try. Let me do a test on one of the files I have.
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. That is not to say if you take a near raw feed (such as your video camera, which can not compress as well due to the video streaming in) it wont compress, but once you run a single pass or double pass filter over it, you will get the about as small as it is going to get. (EDIT: without losing quality that is)
Also I don't know much about RAR but 7zip, you have to get the settings right for the type/size of file you are compressing, proper setting you can get a lot better compression than just default.
Maybe wraithan word carries more weight abachler. Will you care to listen to him?
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
I'm using "Best" compression for both, so no problems there.
First test for this file shows 3% compression gain with 7zip (306 MB vs 314 MB).
As for rar, 2% compression gain (308 MB vs 314 MB).
For tomorrow's test, I'll recompress the file (video compression) and recompress using both rar and 7z again.
So it'd be really bad if we, rar'd a video, zipped the rar'd video, 7zipped the zipped rar'd video?
OK, im dling that file, although its not exacly MPEG4, which is what my original claim was, Ill see what I can do with it.
and when we are done with all that lets ARJ it just to be ........heads
OK I finished DLing it and heres the results I got
Original File - 330,127,360
overall compression ratio 98% (98.07%).
Last edited by abachler; 02-11-2008 at 04:21 PM.
For those interested, the video he used was a view out from a window where nothing was changing except cars in the distance.
Last edited by Sang-drax; 02-11-2008 at 05:08 PM.