Thanks
About videos.
-
Viper92
- Rookie

- Posts: 16
- Joined: 04 Nov 2010, 23:36
About videos.
I gotta question....delete this topic if you want.From the download settings there are two video files - 1 with standard quality and 1 with low quality.I've been watching same vids on youtube and I wanna ask - why is their quality so good in youtube and so alful on my pc?!?!
Thanks
Thanks
-
NoQ
- Special

- Posts: 6226
- Joined: 24 Dec 2009, 11:35
- Location: /var/zone
Re: About videos.
As far as i know, the videos were poorly encoded before being released under GPL, or something like that. So you can't have original lossless videos redistributed on this website, and you can't use them in-game also, because the game doesn't support the codec. A stupid story 
Maps | Tower Defense | NullBot AI | More NullBot AI | Scavs | More Scavs | Tilesets | Walkthrough | JSCam
-
Buginator
- Professional

- Posts: 3285
- Joined: 04 Nov 2007, 02:20
Re: About videos.
No, the original vids are of crap resolution, 320x200 and some lower than that.NoQ wrote:As far as i know, the videos were poorly encoded before being released under GPL, or something like that. So you can't have original lossless videos redistributed on this website, and you can't use them in-game also, because the game doesn't support the codec. A stupid story
They just look like crap when they get stretched out.
You can't make something 320x200 look good at 1920x1080.
That is also why the name changes, standard is more or less what you see in the original game.
Low is a version that is sampled less than the std version, so it looks even worse when stretched.
and it ends here.
-
NoQ
- Special

- Posts: 6226
- Joined: 24 Dec 2009, 11:35
- Location: /var/zone
Re: About videos.
Hmm, so what about those wavelet artefacts? Are they also original?
Maps | Tower Defense | NullBot AI | More NullBot AI | Scavs | More Scavs | Tilesets | Walkthrough | JSCam
-
Buginator
- Professional

- Posts: 3285
- Joined: 04 Nov 2007, 02:20
Re: About videos.
Screenshot please, since I am not sure what you mean.NoQ wrote:Hmm, so what about those wavelet artefacts? Are they also original?
For what it is worth, we do have the original uncompressed avi vids someplace on GNA I think, 1GB or more of data, if you think you can encode them better, then be our guest.
and it ends here.
-
Viper92
- Rookie

- Posts: 16
- Joined: 04 Nov 2010, 23:36
Re: About videos.
I don't need to stretch the video to whole screen to see the crap screen.Even i small rezolution like 320:200 looks bad...
-
Amund
- New user
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 23 Sep 2009, 21:35
Re: About videos.
It's time to improve on the quality I think, with my 1920x1080 40" TV and the new fantastic graphics of the trunk version the videos look very... 1999. I'd sure like to give it a shot - but I'd need to know what formats WZ can decode? And how the vids are all indexed - or are they just separate files? Or do I have to hack in an H.264 decoder myself? (QT?)Buginator wrote:NoQ wrote: For what it is worth, we do have the original uncompressed avi vids someplace on GNA I think, 1GB or more of data, if you think you can encode them better, then be our guest.
Will the raw vids work directly in the game? 1 gig isn't that much today, especially if they look way better than the current HQ vids which look pretty bad, and are already 500 megs or something
I'm a complete n00b with the inside of WZ - what does GNA mean and is this somewhere I can look for the original files myself?
-
cybersphinx
- Inactive

- Posts: 1695
- Joined: 01 Sep 2006, 19:17
Re: About videos.
http://download.gna.org/warzone/videos/ ... xed.tar.xz contains uncompressed avis of the original rpls decoded by the original decoder dll. The file is ~800 MB, decompresses to ~10 GB (yes, ten gigabyte - uncompressed means basically a collection of bitmaps, to not degrade quality and keep the final archive small). Those were used to make the current standard quality theora/vorbis files (which is all Warzone can decode atm), see http://sourceforge.net/projects/warzone ... quality-en for the details.
My subjective impression (being the one who encoded them) of the standard quality files was that the recompression didn't introduce many noticeable new artifacts, (painfully) noticeable are only the old artifacts from the original rpl compression. But if anyone wants to try their hand on making better ones (either recompress the current ones for better quality or remake everything completely in 4K (hey, full-hd is so last-decade, think for the future!)), go ahead.
My subjective impression (being the one who encoded them) of the standard quality files was that the recompression didn't introduce many noticeable new artifacts, (painfully) noticeable are only the old artifacts from the original rpl compression. But if anyone wants to try their hand on making better ones (either recompress the current ones for better quality or remake everything completely in 4K (hey, full-hd is so last-decade, think for the future!)), go ahead.