Answers.Body: <p>According to the site you referred to:
  <a href="http://www.encoding.com/what_are_the_best_flash_video_frame_dimensions" rel="nofollow">http://www.encoding.com/what_are_the_best_flash_video_frame_dimensions</a></p>
  
  <p>The math behind the "Best, Better, and Good" video formats are based on if both Horizontal and Vertical pixels are divided by 16 for best, 8 for better, and 4 for good.</p>
  
  <p>Therefore 256x144 is best, while 384x216 &amp; 128x72 are better, while 320x180 is good.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2012-01-24T20:29:45.237Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2012-01-24T21:12:05.190Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2012-01-24T21:12:05.190Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: filzilla
Answers.Body: <p>The resolutions you mentioned are standard in Video codec development are CIF [352x288] and QCIF [176x144] (some other formats here: <a href="http://dvrsecurityforum.com/showthread.php?tid=30" rel="nofollow">http://dvrsecurityforum.com/showthread.php?tid=30</a>) </p>
  
  <p>The reason why all these formats recommend multiple of 16 - is because MPEG compression has Macroblocks which are sized 16x16. </p>
  
  <p>CIF = 22 x 18 Macroblocks. and QCIF is essentially half of it both sides.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2012-03-15T20:13:16.617Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2012-03-15T20:13:16.617Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Dipan Mehta
Body: <p>I'm trying to setup my site to store uploaded user content in a 640x360 frame size, which will be presented back for viewing in that frame size and in a smaller frame size.</p>
  
  <p>I'm trying to understand why this site (and others): <a href="http://www.encoding.com/what_are_the_best_flash_video_frame_dimensions" rel="nofollow">http://www.encoding.com/what_are_the_best_flash_video_frame_dimensions</a> recommend <strong>only</strong> the following values for smaller sizes:</p>
  
  <pre><code>384 x 216
  128 x 72
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>when clearly others like:</p>
  
  <pre><code>320 x 180
  256 x 144
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>also exist.</p>
  
  <p>What is the mathematical reason behind recommending only these frame sizes?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2011-12-21T08:15:17.953Z
Comments.Text: Does this question belong elsewhere?
Comments.UserDisplayName: siliconpi
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2012-03-15T20:08:00.457Z
Comments.Text: This question seems more broadcast and compression specific than AV Production! Inviting experts to a new site proposal [Broadcast and Media Technologies](http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/36807/broadcast-and-media-technologies) which aims to capture more architectural and theoretical views around subjects like this. Join and invite others.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Dipan Mehta
Tags: <streaming><codec>
Title: Scaling optimal video frame dimensions
UserDisplayName: siliconpi
ThreadText: # Scaling optimal video frame dimensions
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2011-12-19)
  
  I'm trying to setup my site to store uploaded user content in a 640x360 frame size, which will be presented back for viewing in that frame size and in a smaller frame size.
  
  I'm trying to understand why this site (and others): <http://www.encoding.com/what_are_the_best_flash_video_frame_dimensions> recommend **only** the following values for smaller sizes:
  
  ```
  384 x 216
  128 x 72
  
  ```
  
  when clearly others like:
  
  ```
  320 x 180
  256 x 144
  
  ```
  
  also exist.
  
  What is the mathematical reason behind recommending only these frame sizes?
  
  **Tags:** streaming, codec
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: Does this question belong elsewhere?  
  > **username_1**: This question seems more broadcast and compression specific than AV Production! Inviting experts to a new site proposal [Broadcast and Media Technologies](http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/36807/broadcast-and-media-technologies) which aims to capture more architectural and theoretical views around subjects like this. Join and invite others.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2012-01-24. Score: 0 | Accepted answer
  
  According to the site you referred to:
  <http://www.encoding.com/what_are_the_best_flash_video_frame_dimensions>
  
  The math behind the "Best, Better, and Good" video formats are based on if both Horizontal and Vertical pixels are divided by 16 for best, 8 for better, and 4 for good.
  
  Therefore 256x144 is best, while 384x216 & 128x72 are better, while 320x180 is good.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2012-03-15. Score: 0
  
  The resolutions you mentioned are standard in Video codec development are CIF [352x288] and QCIF [176x144] (some other formats here: <http://dvrsecurityforum.com/showthread.php?tid=30>)
  
  The reason why all these formats recommend multiple of 16 - is because MPEG compression has Macroblocks which are sized 16x16.
  
  CIF = 22 x 18 Macroblocks. and QCIF is essentially half of it both sides.
  
  
  ---
  
  