I do however agree with you. A soft 3:2 encoding is better than a hard 3:2 encoding in terms of space saving.
I do however agree with you. A soft 3:2 encoding is better than a hard 3:2 encoding in terms of space saving.
Post #282205
- Author
- Alan Partridge
- Parent topic
- .: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
- Link to post in topic
- https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/282205/action/topic#282205
- Date created
- 13-Apr-2007, 3:16 PM
I do however agree with you. A soft 3:2 encoding is better than a hard 3:2 encoding in terms of space saving.