Answers.Body: <p>I can only think of 2 perspectives: industrial and recreational.</p>
  <p>Industrial: visual examination is super expensive, you may take a look of how Netflix do the comparison <a href="https://netflixtechblog.com/performance-comparison-of-video-coding-standards-an-adaptive-streaming-perspective-d45d0183ca95" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://netflixtechblog.com/performance-comparison-of-video-coding-standards-an-adaptive-streaming-perspective-d45d0183ca95</a></p>
  <p>Recreational: you may check out youtube with codec comparison e.g. <div class="youtube-embed"><div>
                  <iframe width="640px" height="395px" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Rzi5QY30Cy4?start=0"></iframe>
              </div></div> or doom9 <div class="youtube-embed"><div>
                  <iframe width="640px" height="395px" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ctjm1kxw-BM?start=0"></iframe>
              </div></div></p>
  <p>Hope this answers your questions.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-19T18:41:09.450Z
Answers.Text: I wouldn't say objective codec testing has to be super expensive. PSNR, SSIM, and VMAF are all freely available (as in beer and as in speech) in ffmpeg. Sure, if you want to use a commercial codec analysis system, like [Interra Vega](https://www.interrasystems.com/vega-analyzer.php), you'll need the budget to support it.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Michael Liebman
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-19T23:39:22.593Z
Answers.Text: Expensive, in my answer, refer to human involvement since workforce and working hour are limited; Better solution is automation.
Answers.UserDisplayName: xer-rex
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-10-19T11:31:06.070Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-10-19T11:31:06.070Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: xer-rex
Body: <p>Maybe I'm mistaken, but a long while ago I seem to have read an article about comparing videos encoded by different codecs.</p>
  <p>Basically what I think what was done, was to put them together in a timeline - and by use of some effects - &quot;null&quot; them so you could only see the difference.</p>
  <p>Now that I'm writing it down, I'm not so sure anymore - but I just wanted to check if someone knows a way to efficiently compare codec compressions.</p>
  
Tags: <compression>
Title: What's the best way to visually compare codec compression?
UserDisplayName: Taapo
ThreadText: # What's the best way to visually compare codec compression?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2020-10-19)
  
  Maybe I'm mistaken, but a long while ago I seem to have read an article about comparing videos encoded by different codecs.
  
  Basically what I think what was done, was to put them together in a timeline - and by use of some effects - "null" them so you could only see the difference.
  
  Now that I'm writing it down, I'm not so sure anymore - but I just wanted to check if someone knows a way to efficiently compare codec compressions.
  
  **Tags:** compression
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2020-10-19. Score: 1
  
  I can only think of 2 perspectives: industrial and recreational.
  
  Industrial: visual examination is super expensive, you may take a look of how Netflix do the comparison <https://netflixtechblog.com/performance-comparison-of-video-coding-standards-an-adaptive-streaming-perspective-d45d0183ca95>
  
  Recreational: you may check out youtube with codec comparison e.g.
  
  or doom9
  
  Hope this answers your questions.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: I wouldn't say objective codec testing has to be super expensive. PSNR, SSIM, and VMAF are all freely available (as in beer and as in speech) in ffmpeg. Sure, if you want to use a commercial codec analysis system, like [Interra Vega](https://www.interrasystems.com/vega-analyzer.php), you'll need the budget to support it.  
  > **username_1**: Expensive, in my answer, refer to human involvement since workforce and working hour are limited; Better solution is automation.  
  
  ---
  
  