Difference in Playback Performance between Catalyst and Quicktime

[SourceChild]

Don't think of Quicktime on a Mac so much as the media player.

Quicktime actually refers the entire media engine in OS X. There are a collection of utilities which a media player only accesses to playback video.

In the case of Catalyst, it is simply a media player to the Kernel. The reason some codecs work well is because Richard integrated them into Catalyst. The reason others don't work well is because Catalyst forwards them to Quicktime from within itself in a manner which is not efficient for continuous frame.

If you're going to use Catalyst. Only use the three main codecs we discuss which are: PhotoJPEG, AIC, or DV.

PhotoJPEG at 50% to 75% depending on the quality needed but 50% is fine.
AIC (Apple intermediate Codec) which generally best overall.
DV (Either NTSC or PAL) which is a fixed ratio but most efficient codec.

Anything other than these will not perform well in Catalyst.

[samsc]

Don't think of Quicktime on a Mac so much as the media player.

Quicktime actually refers the entire media engine in OS X. There are a collection of utilities which a media player only accesses to playback video.

In the case of Catalyst, it is simply a media player to the Kernel. The reason some codecs work well is because Richard integrated them into Catalyst. The reason others don't work well is because Catalyst forwards them to Quicktime from within itself in a manner which is not efficient for continuous frame.

If you're going to use Catalyst. Only use the three main codecs we discuss which are: PhotoJPEG, AIC, or DV.

PhotoJPEG at 50% to 75% depending on the quality needed but 50% is fine.
AIC (Apple intermediate Codec) which generally best overall.
DV (Either NTSC or PAL) which is a fixed ratio but most efficient codec.

Anything other than these will not perform well in Catalyst.

AIC is the ONLY thing that works at these huge sizes- ( DV isnt the most efficient any more AIC is - and you cant change image size )

i do a lot more things on the screen than quicktime player- it doesnt have any graphics processing- it buffers ahead- it doesnt have to deal with compositing more than 1 layers -

[Seantava]

AIC is the ONLY thing that works at these huge sizes- ( DV isnt the most efficient any more AIC is - and you cant change image size )

i do a lot more things on the screen than quicktime player- it doesnt have any graphics processing- it buffers ahead- it doesnt have to deal with compositing more than 1 layers -

Hi Richard,
hi Todd,

i know that Catalyst is working in a different way than the quicktime player. I´m just wondering that the playback speed difference is that big. Normally i´m using the AIC Codec for all of my things, but from time to time the image quality is not good enough. In that special case i tried the animation codec because of the higher quality. Anyway i did some testing with foto jpg as well, and fotojpg 100 is working nearly fine (only one frame drop to 24 FPS, compared to the drop to 13 FPS with the Animation Codec). So, i think foto jpg 75% will work! From time to time i´m using Animation Codec with Alpha to playback Textinformation over Background Images or Movies. So, i was thinking that the animation codec is working the same way than foto JPG 100%, but as you said you have only implemented some codecs in the system. Maybe the Animation Codec could be the next one ?
Apple Intermediate Codec is for some reasons not the best choice, because the image quality is not that good (Rendererd out of Final Cuts Compressor).

Thanks for your response.

Greetings from Germany,

Holger

[Gian]

Hello,...

When you try to play on Quicktime,... if you choose the option

PLAY ALL FRAMES, in Quicktime,... you will get a closer result than playing that same movie on Catalyst, with just one layer activated.

Try that and let us know.

Regards

[samsc]

Hello,...

When you try to play on Quicktime,... if you choose the option

PLAY ALL FRAMES, in Quicktime,... you will get a closer result than playing that same movie on Catalyst, with just one layer activated.

Try that and let us know.

Regards

quicktime player does drop frames - yes absolutely-

catalyst does not drop any frames on playback- its a different design choice-
not dropping frames is more vital in our application space.

also with this sizeof movie you are very close the the edge of performance of entire computer - suggest you use AIC immediately

[samsc]

Hi Richard,
hi Todd,

i know that Catalyst is working in a different way than the quicktime player. I´m just wondering that the playback speed difference is that big. Normally i´m using the AIC Codec for all of my things, but from time to time the image quality is not good enough. In that special case i tried the animation codec because of the higher quality. Anyway i did some testing with foto jpg as well, and fotojpg 100 is working nearly fine (only one frame drop to 24 FPS, compared to the drop to 13 FPS with the Animation Codec). So, i think foto jpg 75% will work! From time to time i´m using Animation Codec with Alpha to playback Textinformation over Background Images or Movies. So, i was thinking that the animation codec is working the same way than foto JPG 100%, but as you said you have only implemented some codecs in the system. Maybe the Animation Codec could be the next one ?
Apple Intermediate Codec is for some reasons not the best choice, because the image quality is not that good (Rendererd out of Final Cuts Compressor).

Thanks for your response.

Greetings from Germany,

Holger

3000x1000 images!!!!
its not playback speed - that is different- you have a huge image size- and all that has to be processed to do something- and this takes time-

if AIC doesnt work you probably have the wrong settings- and you outputted a scaled up movie instead-

Animation codec is run length encoded compression, AIC and photojpeg are jpeg compression- they are compleletly different-

you also have to bear in mind that all codec performance is dependant on the nature of the image - and the data rate per frame-