Is this fast? (iSquint)

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by suneohair, Nov 4, 2006.

  1. suneohair macrumors 68020

    suneohair

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    #1
    I just had iSquint convert a 350MB TV show (DivX) to an iPod H.264 file using the 'Go Nuts' setting. It took about 12 minutes.

    I have a mac pro 2.66Ghz, 2GB.

    I don't deal with video, so I have no idea how long something like that should take. Does that seem pretty quick though?

    Attached are details of the original video file from Quicktime.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. ironjaw macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Location:
    Cold Copenhagen
    #2
    I'm no expert but I'm always weary about converting already compressed media over to another superior format. .mp4 is far better than Divx IMHO.;)

    Unless you have the source and convert that to .mp4 that's where you see the real quality. Divx is already compressed and is limited to the quality setting it was originally was set.

    Other than that 12 min is not bad for 350mb. I think I got 200mb around to 20mb around the same time with my G4 iBook:D
     
  3. suneohair thread starter macrumors 68020

    suneohair

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    #3
    It is going to an iPod from a higher res source. I just don't know if that is quick for video encoding.

    The output file was 315MB so it wasnt very small. I will try Standard encoding and see what happens.
     
  4. ironjaw macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Location:
    Cold Copenhagen
    #4
    True though, but my file was to my cellphone sony erricsson w810 :D.

    315 is fair because its H.264 it always is larger... so I would say 12 min is not bad for H.264. Try normal mpeg
     
  5. ironjaw macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Location:
    Cold Copenhagen
    #5
    iSquint is pretty good program, I use it myself alot but to get the best file you have obviously play around with the settings
     
  6. Killyp macrumors 68040

    Killyp

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    #6
    As for a response to the OQ, yes it was very very VERY fast, but it should be on that machine!!! :D :D

    Could do with twice the RAM though, then it would really have space to breathe. That's the bottleneck at the moment...
     
  7. jonutarr macrumors regular

    jonutarr

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Location:
    OZ
    #7
    why make it high quality when the picture/sound will still be as low as the original?
     

Share This Page