<?xml version="1.0"?><!-- generator="bbPress" -->

<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>

<channel>
<title>Videomaker Community Forums &#187; Tag: Red Giant Software - Recent Topics</title>
<link>http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/</link>
<description>Videomaker Community Forums &#187; Tag: Red Giant Software - Recent Topics</description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 06:48:08 +0000</pubDate>

<item>
<title>chrisv39 on "Final Cut Pro - Video Quality, what&#039;s the best but smallest?"</title>
<link>http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/final-cut-pro-video-quality-whats-the-best-but-smallest#post-32941</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2007 07:03:01 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>chrisv39</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink="false">32941@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/</guid>
<description>&#60;p&#62;cfulton Wrote:&#60;/p&#62;&#60;blockquote&#62;This is kind of a slow forum, but good things come to the patient. (Welcome all the same--we're glad you're here.)&#60;br /&#62;
&#60;br /&#62;
The first codec that comes to mind is H.264. You could drop the clips in question into Compressor and convert away; the resulting clips will be half the size (or possibly even smaller). But it'll take a while, depending on the speed of your Macintosh.&#60;/blockquote&#62;&#60;br /&#62;
&#60;br /&#62;
Is there any codec that it will keep the resolution almost the same, could be even a tad smaller and be compressed to a lower file size? Because I converted this one file, used to be 11GB, then when I output it in Final Cut, I check marked the Recompress frames or something like that, and it is now 610MB and its really nice quality. By me putting a check mark beside that option, what did it do really?</description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>

