Alpha Channels: Performance Note Regarding PNG vs Animation Movies
-
Dear All,
I wanted to alert you to a performance measurement that might be important if you need movies encoded with an alpha channel.
On Windows, the Animations codec was approximately 10x more efficient than the PNG codec.A 350x350 pixel movie required 5ms per frame to decode when it was PNG, and about 0.5 ms per frame when it was the Animation codec.
I haven't made a measurement on the Mac, but I expect the results to be similar.
It should be noted that these graphics were suited to the Animation codec, i.e., at least some areas of continuous color. I'll try to do a more serious test with more varied content in the future, but I would recommend that you start with the Animation codec.
He had also used JPEG2000 on one clip, and this for sure should never be used! It is absolutely horrifyingly slow.
Over and out,
Mark -
It may become irrelevant if Hap really is what it seems to be.
-
Also, I would add that, DXV codec (quicktime) with alpha, on windows seems to perform similarly to Photo Jpeg.. no hard figures, but I was impressed.
Thats without the proprietary gpu enhancements, so Yes @Vanakaru, Hap might by pass it for that reason, but currently for alpha playback on PC I go for DXV. -
I have not tested Hap versus DXV, but latter was much better than Amimation and PNG even without GPU acceleration.
