On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Jack <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:jack@rybn.org">jack@rybn.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
So the comportment is the same under GEM ?</blockquote><div><br>It really depends on the OS and API used to decode the video.  Quicktime has similar performance using either Motion or Photo JPEG, and ffmpeg treats them equally well in Windows using FFDShow.  I don&#39;t know if libquicktime is handling these codecs on Linux or not.  <br>
 </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
But it is better to use Photo-JPEG for scratch video for example<br>
(sending a float in the second inlet) ?<br></blockquote><div><br>Use Photo-JPEG  for non-interlaced sources and Motion for interlaced.  Or deinterlace before converting to Photo.<br></div></div><br>