Henry Cho |
August 21st, 2005 09:58 PM |
i'm assuming you're talking about compression for playback on a computer? then you're talking about 640x480 vs 320x240. your question implies filesize is a consideration. if filesize is indeed an issue, 320x240 high quality should result in a smaller filesize than 640x480 at lower quality using the same format. that said, i would probably rather see a high quality 320x240 than an overly compressed 640x480. 320x240 high quality will look ok scaled up, but bad compression artifacts tend to stay visible scaled down.
|