[MEncoder-users] capture: synchronization problems

[amber]

> > i understand mjpeg causes some artifacts.
>
> I've never seen such artifacts. I could be wrong though. Could someone tell me
> exactly what artifacts? MJPEG by definiton is lossy, but for all my capturing
> needs I found it very high quaality at small filesize.

don't ask me :)
as a newbie i just wanted to do some capture. i tried some codecs and decided that
mjpeg looked "good enough", the filesize was reasonable (big, but still small enough
to avoid any hdd transfer limitations) and the process had a low CPU use. so i decided
to use this for capture and then to re-encode for the target format.

then i wrote to this group and the first question was: why mjpeg? why not directly
mpeg2, why not mpeg4 and so on. i am a little bit confused, especially about the
suggestion on mpeg4 because i believed mpeg4 gives good results+small filesize but
only when we use 2-pass encoding (which is not the case while capturing). right?