- Sorenson squeeze pro vs compressor 4 portable#
- Sorenson squeeze pro vs compressor 4 software#
- Sorenson squeeze pro vs compressor 4 windows#
I could have gone two ways with this category: choose a big-iron, on-premise encoder for periodic or continuous broadcasts, or highlight a portable unit for live event broadcasting from the road. Hardware Live Encoder: Digital Rapids TouchStream
The Elemental Server-the one to choose for high-volume, high-quality H.264 encoding. But if high-volume, high-quality H.264 encoding is your need, Elemental Server should be atop your short list.
Sorenson squeeze pro vs compressor 4 windows#
Server is kind of a one-trick pony its Windows Media output is subpar, and it doesn't output VP6 or WebM. Closed caption support is quite extensive, including the ability to embed subtitles or create subtitle files (SRT, SMI, and TTML files) for MPEG-2 transport streams, Smooth Streaming, Flash, and Apple iOS devices. Elemental Server's deinterlacing function is outstanding - it's a key quality consideration for those distributing interlaced-source footage. Though operation is browser-based, there's a lot of logic built into the interface, including error checking, which helps prevent launching jobs that will fail after processing begins. The Linux-driven server incorporates two six-core Westmere-class Intel Xeon CPUs and two NVIDIA Corp. With users such as ESPN and multiple Olympic broadcasters, it's clear that I'm not the only one who thinks so. That said, choosing the representative product, Elemental Server, was still an obvious choice it's the fastest H.264 encoder that I've ever tested, with very good quality. Digital Rapids Cisco and others, there are lots of worthy products in this category.
With entrants from industry veterans such as Envivio, Inc. Hardware On-Demand Encoder: Elemental Server
Sorenson squeeze pro vs compressor 4 software#
Let's start with on-demand and live hardware products, and then work our way to software and cloud- based encoders. This doesn't mean that the products that I didn't choose aren't worthy rather, it just means that I wasn't as familiar with them as the products that I wrote about. My criteria for product selection are unavoidably subjective in most instances, I chose the products that I knew the best and have worked with the most, and know to be competent at their intended tasks. In this overview article, I'll identify the most critical market segments and discuss one or two key products within each market.
It provides higher-quality results than QuickTime Pro and is easier to use than Cleaner.The streaming media encoding universe has evolved into a complex space with multiple, often intersecting markets. But if you’re on a tight budget, or if you want to integrate OS X into your production workflow, embrace Squeeze. There’s no reason to buy Squeeze if you already have Cleaner 5 or if you’re just getting started with Web video and can afford Cleaner instead. For example, you can’t save a modified compression setting for future reuse. In addition, Squeeze lacks some of the workflow conveniences that Cleaner offers. In general, the quality of Squeeze’s compression results far exceeds that of QuickTime Pro’s but tends to fall short of Cleaner’s results. Squeeze also provides a simple auto-crop feature that slices ten pixels off the top and bottom of your movie–terrific for cleaning up the video noise that often accompanies content captured from analog tape, such as VHS videocassettes. You can modify the presets in Squeeze to apply the program’s image-tweaking features, which include contrast, brightness, and gamma adjustments, as well as white- and black-level controls.
0 kommentar(er)
