Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Subject: Re: [AE] OT: WebM and Theora plug-ins for Premiere
From: Brendan Bolles <brendan@fnordware.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-5319498@media-motion.tv>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 19:53:47 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9FF7F903-532A-4B9B-A8E6-DC7E9084E33E@fnordware.com>
References: <list-5319498@media-motion.tv>
To: "After Effects Mail List" <AE-List@media-motion.tv>

On Dec 16, 2013, at 7:40 PM, scott.aelist wrote:

> Well that's pretty cool. I haven't investigated these formats much. Do =
you find they have advantages over h264 (other than being open source?) =
Do you get better quality or smaller file-sizes?


VP8 in WebM is roughly equivalent to H.264, and VP9 should be roughly =
equivalent to the forthcoming H.265.  Theora, based on VP3, is pretty =
old technology and not nearly as good, but some people still need it.

I think H.264 does generally have a slight edge over VP8, especially =
when using the excellent x264 encoder.  Not sure about Adobe's encoder.  =
=46rom what I've read, having a high-quality encoder can make as much =
difference as having a high-quality format.  Google should probably hire =
the x264 people and put them to work on their VP9 encoder.

One big advantage for me is that WebM is not QuickTime.  So there is no =
chance of someone opening a WebM file in QuickTime and getting some sort =
of weird gamma issue.

I haven't done thorough real-world comparisons though.  That's what you =
guys are for.  ;)


Brendan