Talk:Quality factor (video compression)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Bad article name

This article is very strangely named. The described quality factor is

a) in no way directly connected to Xvid nor used mainly for this codec. It can be applied to any video.

b) commonly known as "BPF", short for "bits per pixel and frame".

I propose renaming it to "Bits per pixel and frame"

Brother-John 00:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, that the article name is completely misleading. The QF has *nothing* to do with XviD. It is a measure to indiciate the amount of memory/storage used per pixel (and frame) in a video. I have not seen the abbreviation BPF before, so I suggest the article should just be renamed to "Quality factor (video compression)". The article "quality factor" should make a reference to this article then. -84.59.37.248 (talk) 16:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I just extended the article a little bit. It would be nice if someone with administrative rights could change the article name and then remove the cleanup/merge notice -84.59.37.248 (talk) 16:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

You don't need need to be an admin to move articles, any Wikipedian who has been registered for a few days can move articles. Please discuss what name it should be moved to and move it (by using the "move" rider on the top) :-). I've removed the current move-tag because as far as I see the problem is exactly that it doesn't have anything to do with Xvid, so the tag was misleading. Malc82 (talk) 23:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not registered, so there's no "move"-rider for me. ;) If nobody objects, the article should be renamed to "Quality factor (video compression)". In any case, the Xvid-part should be removed immediately! -84.59.37.248 (talk) 03:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

^=^__ I'd like to see information about how the table of quality factors for different codecs, was derived, or a citation referencing where the information came from. I'd like to learn more about this. I have no problem with the title of the article (that's how I found it). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.105.18.100 (talk) 06:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)