 Fake Video Acceleration |
  |
 Jun 8 2006, 07:48 AM
Post
#1
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 426 Joined: 10-February 04 From: Virginia, USA Member No.: 1,794  |
Would buying a faster CF card result in better video playback? I've seen some CF cards that claim speeds of 150X, which theoretically should be able to "read" (and hopefully playback) files faster. Are there any speed limits on our 6000s? Or is video playback quality mostly affected by graphics hardware?
|
 |
 
|
|
Jun 8 2006, 01:39 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 577 Joined: 17-March 04 Member No.: 2,365 |
Nope - the bottleneck is the graphic hardware. 640x480 will never be possible. Something between qvga and vga would be - this should be tested.
Guylhem |
|
|
|
|
Jun 8 2006, 02:09 PM
Post
#3
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 2,821 Joined: 13-September 04 From: Wasilla Ak. Member No.: 4,572 |
QUOTE(guylhem @ Jun 8 2006, 09:39 PM) Nope - the bottleneck is the graphic hardware. 640x480 will never be possible. Something between qvga and vga would be - this should be tested. Guylhem  I'm not even sure about that. in practical terms vga is a decent format to store video. BUT for small screen limited storage devices qvga is just fine. Qvga looks good on my 4"-3.7" screens and a movie crunches down to @200 megs in decently encoded qvga. Qvga scales up to small tv screens ok..looks ok in a window--is fairly standard and easy to manipulate. I'm really not sure there is a benefit to going with sideways movies or weird resolutions. Further, trying to do smalll files in vga means artifacting, data loss, low sound quality, etc--or comparatively huge files (600-700meg) not good tradeoffs. An overly compressed vga video looks worse than a nicely done qvga video, imho. My personal solution is to make "big" vga files for my desktop, and crunche'm into qvga with avidemux2 for my zaurus. |
|
|
|
|
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th May 2013 - 10:01 AM |