Super Compression Software

waynegohl said:
i don't understand how one movie cannot fit onto a 2 gig card when i used to have 6 movies on my 2gig mp4 player before.
Click to expand...
If the person who converted the movie from DVD to avi was a noob then movies can look really k@k and still have a massive filesize.

Check if its in Xvid/divx/264 format...those gives the best band per buck filesize-wise.
 
waynegohl said:
hey the noob is me and they come out fantastic, ha ha.
Click to expand...
oops.:o

As long as they look good then the bigger filesize is excusable.;)

Just use something like fairusewizard2 and then specify the filesize as 700mb & 264 format &encoding slider set to quality. Takes a lot of time but the end result is good. Make sure you crop the black bands on the left/right/top/bottom.:)
 
HavocXphere said:
oops.:o

As long as they look good then the bigger filesize is excusable.;)

Just use something like fairusewizard2 and then specify the filesize as 700mb & 264 format &encoding slider set to quality. Takes a lot of time but the end result is good. Make sure you crop the black bands on the left/right/top/bottom.:)
Click to expand...

ha ha just teasing but i am doing it myself for myself so if it looks k@k who will know.

thanks for the info i will have a look, i am trying something else at this very moment to see how it turns out.
 
800Kbps is usually as low as you'd want to go for a movie to keep decent quality at just under DVD resolution. If you want to drop it lower (which should give you lower than CD-size per movie), you probably want to drop the resolution lower as well.
 
super? yeah super slow. 256 bit encryption stands out but thats a bit overkill imho
anyway...
waynegohl said:
i need to compress some avi files from a dvd to fit onto a 2gig card, i have done it before but it was a few years ago and cannot remember what i used.

what program can i use thats easy and fast?
Click to expand...

you might want to look into http://www.autogk.me.uk/ for re-encoding videos to a certian size.
 
Actually, the information theorists as well as what you read have been lying to you.
It's a big cover up.
I've been working on my data compression program for over 7 years and so far it can turn a 4 gig file of randomly generated and zipped up data and compress it to 1.5 gig
then I can run it through the process again, bringing it down from 1.5 gig to 3.77 mega bytes
and I can run it through again and again....
It's simple math actually and/or redundancy checking along with other methods.
The idea is it's an artificial intelligence that I programmed for the sole purpose of compressing files.
It uses 1024 byte blocks and compresses them. It evolves and evolves, and still to this day it's evolving, improving it's methods.
And it chooses how to compress the files. I simply setup the rules and play mother nature. ( one could say a Darwin evolution program )
Really, if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself and never believe that things aren't possible just because someone says it's not. Even if they say that they have a college degree in whatever.
If I put my program on the Internet, it would become a national security risk, and probably the government would step in.

I realize that this is an older forum but I just wanted to make my point clear. Perfect compression will be achieved when the computer finds the fastest way to compress data that it can. And allow for multiple passes.

A jpg file is supposed to be considered as compressed but using Arithmetic encoding and the statistical Modeling we can actually squeeze a little more compression out of it at the cost of speed/time.
If you take 1024 bytes (1 kilobyte) chunk from that jpg file and turn it into a base 10 number, you'd have a very huge number. But you can use an equation to represent that number that takes up less than 1024 bytes.
Therefore getting compression. And the Artificial Intelligence program not only does this but it's good at finding short cuts in the math to achieve the end result quickly and effectively.

So please, Don't listen to information theorists for answers. It's all possible. -hodonkain

Also scientists will find a huge jump in technology since the introduction of the quantum computer. It makes evolving equations and simulations extremely quick. You should check it out.
 
Hodonkain, what you're saying is BS...and you're supporting it with conspiracy theories?
 
If you take 1024 bytes (1 kilobyte) chunk from that jpg file and turn it into a base 10 number
Click to expand...
You would have a massive number about 8000 bytes long.

But you can use an equation to represent that number that takes up less than 1024 bytes
Click to expand...
No, it would take up less than 8000 bytes.

Numnuts.
 
Lol... Fail.

Yeah, Shannon and Nyquist wasted their lives... NOT.

What an insult.
 
hodonkain said:
Actually, the information theorists as well as what you read have been lying to you.
It's a big cover up.
I've been working on my data compression program for over 7 years and so far it can turn a 4 gig file of randomly generated and zipped up data and compress it to 1.5 gig
then I can run it through the process again, bringing it down from 1.5 gig to 3.77 mega bytes
and I can run it through again and again....
It's simple math actually and/or redundancy checking along with other methods.
The idea is it's an artificial intelligence that I programmed for the sole purpose of compressing files.
It uses 1024 byte blocks and compresses them. It evolves and evolves, and still to this day it's evolving, improving it's methods.
And it chooses how to compress the files. I simply setup the rules and play mother nature. ( one could say a Darwin evolution program )
Really, if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself and never believe that things aren't possible just because someone says it's not. Even if they say that they have a college degree in whatever.
If I put my program on the Internet, it would become a national security risk, and probably the government would step in.

I realize that this is an older forum but I just wanted to make my point clear. Perfect compression will be achieved when the computer finds the fastest way to compress data that it can. And allow for multiple passes.

A jpg file is supposed to be considered as compressed but using Arithmetic encoding and the statistical Modeling we can actually squeeze a little more compression out of it at the cost of speed/time.
If you take 1024 bytes (1 kilobyte) chunk from that jpg file and turn it into a base 10 number, you'd have a very huge number. But you can use an equation to represent that number that takes up less than 1024 bytes.
Therefore getting compression. And the Artificial Intelligence program not only does this but it's good at finding short cuts in the math to achieve the end result quickly and effectively.

So please, Don't listen to information theorists for answers. It's all possible. -hodonkain

Also scientists will find a huge jump in technology since the introduction of the quantum computer. It makes evolving equations and simulations extremely quick. You should check it out.
Click to expand...

That gave me a good chuckle. Thanks :)

Even if you calculate an equation to describe a series of numbers, that equation would soon be more complex than the data represented. If you've got "infinite" processing power, you can use very complex compression calculations, but you still cannot get past entropy.

You should get into marketing.
 
davemc said:
You would have a massive number about 8000 bytes long.


No, it would take up less than 8000 bytes.

Numnuts.
Click to expand...

Actually, his idea isn't very novel. There's been quite a bit of research done into turning images into mathematical formulas and it actually works, but a hell of a lot of quality is lost in the examples I have seen, so it's not ideal.
Anyway, yeah, this guy's a loon.
 
Well...there's but a fine line between loons and geniuses...

So he is saying like:
32985472985 x 12847319284123 (after) = 4.237749031761088e+23 (before)
and if there is anything remotely similar to pi, write pi5 instead of 3.14159265

Guess it may work to some extent...
 
Messugga said:
Actually, his idea isn't very novel. There's been quite a bit of research done into turning images into mathematical formulas and it actually works, but a hell of a lot of quality is lost in the examples I have seen, so it's not ideal.
Anyway, yeah, this guy's a loon.
Click to expand...

That's the difference between lossy and lossless compression.

JPG and MPEG-2/3/4 are all lossy compression schemes. They are all some form of mathematical formula really.

JPEG 2000 uses a type of wavelet compression that transforms the image into coefficients (basically what the loon is talking about), and then compresses that using 'normal' compression algorithms to compress the transformed data.

PNG also has a wavelet transform, but I'm not sure if it is used with all it's options.

---

"Replacing 3.14150265 with pi5"

That is the basis of many compression schemes, though the 'dictionary' is usually built from the data itself. It looks for common 'words' in the noise, and compresses based on that. Many compression algorithms use specific modes for certain file types to tweak its effectiveness for those types of files. If the user opts for speed over absolute size for instance, the program might decide not to compress things like mp3, avi or jpg, as the chances of gaining anything from compression is minimal.

Things like text would compress extremely well however, as you would be mainly using alphabet characters, primarily lower case and have lots of spaces and vowels thrown in. Even common words like 'the' 'is' and 'and' would help compression.

The limit or 'entropy' point would be where the dictionary, and the references to the dictionary become larger than the data itself would have been.

--- a basic compression method for images was Run Length Encoding (RLE). It worked quite well for images where lots of solid colours were used. It basically works by saying "Colour X 50 pixels" "Colour Y, 10 pixels". The web page you are looking at would be a prime candidate for this, as it contains a LOT of background colour.

Anyhow... I'm rambling on again...
 
Messugga said:
Thanks for the informative post - worth more than the average one found on this forum!
Click to expand...

Agree.

Nice post Pyro. But dare i ask why we are still looking into compression in this day and age of 2TB HDD's? come on really ---- unless you need to backup google.com
 
Compression is still vital for internet transmission and video.

Uncompressed video is just ... insane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X