I just got an email from the MetaX team saying they have just released a new update to the program that apparently tags and handles .mov files (mostly from Visual Hubs new 5.1 .mov format) in a much more stable fashion. My question to you guys is it OK to start encoding my 720p .mkvs using the .mov container? I want to keep the 5.1 surround sound, but will really only be using it on my AppleTV and MacBook Pro. Any disadvantages to using .mov in terms of quality? I'm just pumped that MetaX can now successfully tag these files, so if I can just get a thumbs up from you guys for the .mov container, then I'm going to start encoding in the .mov from VisualHub 5.1.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is .mov inferior to .mp4 in terms of video quality?
- Thread starter Blazer5913
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I always think of it as a file quality vs. size issue. That being said, I think the h.264 codec (which I believe results in an MP4 file) is the best option. I've encoded many files for my business (I'm a video producer) in H.264 and find the files size to quality ratio to be the best of all the codecs.
In shot, you can get as nice a looking file from other .mov codecs, but the resulting file would be bigger.
In shot, you can get as nice a looking file from other .mov codecs, but the resulting file would be bigger.
.mov is a container, not a codec. You can put h.264 (and others) in it without any problems.
Yeah more than likely! I have a hard time explaining to my clients the difference between a codec and a container. They usually ask for "QuickTime" or a ".mov" file. My usual response is, "well what codec do you want me to use". I've had many a time where I encoded something that the client couldn't view. At that point they usually lock up and say "huh?".
So NightStorm, am I safe if assuming I can give my clients the the best codec (whatever the the flavor of the month might be) in a .mov wrapper? Is .mov the the most recognizable file type for macs and pc's?
H264 is a better encode and I prefer the MP4 container because of the extra tags (such as ratings etc).
If you don't plan on using the advanced tags I would say go with a .mov (Oh which a h264 will fit just fine)
Sounds like good advice. So in terms of giving my client something they can play on their computer, be it a PC or MAC, is .mov the "lowest common denominator"? In other words, will most users be able to play a.mov?
Thanks for your guidance!
Is there a consensus here? My options are
1) Use Handbrake for DVD and have mp4 files with 5.1 and stereo - no worries
2) When converting a MPEG 2 file, use VH and choose Apple TV (Not 5.1) - no worries?
3) When converting a MPEG 2 file, use VH and choose Apple TV 5.1 - I get a mov file which Metax now will tag art, description, rating, etc???
I have no plans to use the files on an IPOD but I would the possibility for the files to work on my Mac or PC. Am I just better off picking option 2, especially since I am not exactly recording sci fi movies?
1) Use Handbrake for DVD and have mp4 files with 5.1 and stereo - no worries
2) When converting a MPEG 2 file, use VH and choose Apple TV (Not 5.1) - no worries?
3) When converting a MPEG 2 file, use VH and choose Apple TV 5.1 - I get a mov file which Metax now will tag art, description, rating, etc???
I have no plans to use the files on an IPOD but I would the possibility for the files to work on my Mac or PC. Am I just better off picking option 2, especially since I am not exactly recording sci fi movies?