4 ms·
This is an interesting discussion, thank you. It would be great to see it compared with the parallel ImageMagick methods: http://www.imagemagick.org/Usage/anim
by theophrastus 12y ago
This is an interesting discussion, thank you. It would be great to see it compared with the parallel ImageMagick methods: http://www.imagemagick.org/Usage/anim_opt/ http://www.imagemagick.org/Usage/anim_opt/
- ux 12y agoImageMagick is very popular, but apparently the algorithms in pngquant gives excellent results. Don't forget to include it if you do comparisons with the different solutions. Also keep in mind that the compression efficiency and quality depends a lot on the content and how you play with the encoding options (how surprising...). I tried to cover most of the cases in my post, but make sure you are "fluent" with the other tools as well to make an objective comparison. Overall, I think FFmpeg trump-card is that it includes the whole stack; timing, decoding, filtering, encoding, everything is in.