.mkv files? What about it?

Walt Disney · #1 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

who knows about .mkv files ?

because in emule i was going to download a film and i saw the film in
.avi and the in .mkv

i was wondering if it's going to be a new format :?

adicoto · #2 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

mkv it's not a new format. It's old enough. It's the container named Matroska and seems to be preffered among the encoders for some features that avi container can't handle properly. In a matroska container you can insert video, multiple audio (one 2.0, one 5.1 and so) and multiple subtitles streams. Also support for a larger number of video compressors than avi format (x264 to mention it's more than enough).

Walt Disney · #3 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

But the past,present and future is .avi, right?

adicoto · #4 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

The past is MPEG, the present is AVi, the future is MKV.

Walt Disney · #5 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

What are you saying, that from now on, we are going to find more films with .mkv ?

and .avi versus .mkv video quality, who wins?

Tizio · #6 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walt Disney

What are you saying, that from now on, we are going to find more films with .mkv ?

and .avi versus .mkv video quality, who wins?

Probably in the future it will be the result..
If you compare AVI to MKV... it depends on the ripper and the codec used, if MKV uses x264... well... the winner will surely be MKV (at the same resulting size) :lol:

(even if I still prefere AVI)

Farlight · #7 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

Yeah avi is ancient. :) mkv quality is better of course, it has support for codec like H.264/AVC among other technical stuff that avi doesn't. It's a better container if you're an encoder but I hardly think it will replace avi in the long run. It's just not famous enough to get away with it :lol: checkout www.matroska.org for the complete list of features.

J7N · #8 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

A Matroska file of the same size will be of a little higher quality because of less overhead than AVI. The main difference in quality however comes from the format of video and audio.

In Matroska you can store just about any of the popular video and audio formats. You don't have to use AAC just because you would like to use AVC but the MP4 does't support your audio format. Matroska also offers an official way to describe each stored track, so that you know the langage and can identify Director's Commens prior to listening.

My personal opinion: Matroska was designed as a container for videos "backupped" by users and serves this purpose best. Other containers were created either for streaming, or commercial purposes.

adicoto · #9 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

The first "stand alone" matroska player will be the doomsday for AVI.

J7N · #10 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

DVD is the standard archival medium for some time now. However, the scene continues to release AVIs of 700 or 350 megabytes.

adicoto · #11 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

Depends on what do you understand by "scene". For me, for most than one year, they release only MKV files on DVD 5 and DVD 9. Probably it's a different "scene"

J7N · #12 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

What about non-HD material, like TV series? I also try not to download them, only original DVD releases, but they exist.

adicoto · #13 (**permalink**) 7th May 2007

Yes, I know they exist, in 350 MB format as standard avi and as HDTV rip usually in 720p format, around 1.2 GB per episode.
I know that part of the scene too. But I like the other one more for now.

Juggalo · #14 (**permalink**) 17th May 2007

I don't get it. VLC plays .mkv files on my system, so does Media Player Classic, but BSplayer doesn't.

This can't be a matter of missing codecs, right? (otherwise the other players wouldn't play it either)

Now what?

Digiface · #15 (**permalink**) 17th May 2007

You have to install Matroska splitter: http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...a_Splitter.htm

VLC and MPC got build-in splitters.

Tizio · #16 (**permalink**) 17th May 2007

right

wolfmandim · #17 (**permalink**) 20th February 2009

I want to convert MOV to MKV but I cannot find the differences. Can some tell me:
1. Is it worth converting?
2. What is the size difference? Which of the two video formats occupies less space in the hard disk (without loss of picture quality)?

adicoto · #18 (**permalink**) 20th February 2009

MOV it's just a container, like MKV. The difference it's that MOV it's Apple's quick time proprietary format, while MKV it's open source. They both support same compresion format.
As a general ideea, re-compresing a compressed format just gives you a file in witch quality is lost.

Tizio · #19 (**permalink**) 20th February 2009

I converted my father's TZ5 videos from MOV to XviD AVIs with an almost lossless quality (note the almost word) and gaining about a 90% in size

wolfmandim · #20 (**permalink**) 21st February 2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tizio

I converted my father's TZ5 videos from MOV to XviD AVIs with an almost lossless quality (note the almost word) and gaining about a 90% in size

I have been trying to settle on a conversion program but I can't figure out which. Can you specify which program you used for the conversion? I will appreciate some details as I use the same camera.