which format is best

[ecos]

hello

in a website a video is offered in wmv and in mpg format
can you tell me please what the best quality?
if there is no fixed answer, how can I assess their quality after I download both?

thanks

[guns1inger]

Watch them . . . . . . ?

There is little in the way of imperical, qualitative comparison tools, especially across codecs. Whichever looks the best, when comparing web quality downloads, usually is the best.

If you are looking to do something with the videos afterwards, mpeg is often easier to work with.

[ecos]

I was looking for a more 'accurate' way to determine which is best, than watching them...

[Noahtuck]

Download them both and check their spec's with G-spot....
That's about as accurate as you're gonna get 8)

[kevo777]

Like guns1inger said, it's in the eye of the beholder. In my opinion, comparing specs in GSpot will tell you nothing. It's an apples and oranges comparison. At the end of the day it boils down to you having to watch both and see which you like better visually. The tools and techniques that went into encoding both files determined how they ended up looking. Guns1inger was also correct in what was mentioned about doing anything with it later. Stick to the MPG file.

Guns1inger is wise.

[Cornucopia]

Well, you could do something statistical like PSNR measuring (which would work with ANY codec), but to do that correctly, you'd also need the original uncompressed source to use as a reference (then you'd be comparing good, bad and so-so apples to best apples). The MSU (russian) site has a PSNR comparison utility...
If you don't have the source file, you're better off comparing by eye. Then, to do it correctly, you'll have to train your eye to catch all the different types of "mistakes" and "cheats" that a codec makes. Could take a while and requires quite a bit of homework (like fully understanding the "Gibbs" phenomenon, an how different Q-tables affect the sharpness/smoothness regardless of the codec).

Scott