Talk:YULS

YULS and MSU relations
As I would conclude, YULS is developed by the same people who developed MSU Lossless Video Codec. I suspect that MSU codec should be considered as a renamed version of MSU codec, but I can't find any information on this topic. If found, it should be added to the article. Furthermore, the comparison in the article is conducted by the authors of these codecs, so it might have biases towards them. Actually, I suspect that both codecs mentioned above were developed to score in this comparison. Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:41, 24 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I've contacted the author of MSU, and it appears that MSU and YULS are developed as a part of a competition of a kind. They are created by different people, though there is a common person, whose input in both cases was limited to discussing the underlying ideas. &mdash; Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 11:12, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

best compression ratio?
Did a quick and dirty benchmark by comparing YULS with FFV1, HuffYUV and Lagarith. Since YULS has a resolution limit of 1024x768 (outdated much?), I'm working with a resolution of 1024x432 (resized and cropped) for all codecs and the raw (including avi container overhead). The source is the raw trailer for Sintel:

So in this case, it does provide the best compression. Story might be different with more stationary pictures (eg desktop screen capture) and real world recordings. My conclusion: I don't see the point in using it. It provides only marginal improvement over size, but is unsuited for video editing as it is very slow in comparison (around 1/80 the speed of multithreaded(4x) Lagarith) and its resolution limitations (multiple of 16, max. 1024x768) make it only usable in few environments.Oehr (talk) 02:40, 13 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I have softened this claim. ~Kvng (talk) 16:47, 20 May 2023 (UTC)