Mobotix posted an article on H.264 (h.t. John Honovich). I thought it was a good source of information describing some potential issues with H.264, I believe the concerns raised are valid and real. But, as Steve points out in his tweet, the argument is perhaps a straw-man argument as it describes issues that occur in constant bit-rate encoding, which is what broadcasters like to use (as they have a pretty fixed bandwidth budget per channel). Most cameras will allow you to pick constant quality, essentially turning each I-frame into a JPEG if there is a lot of motion (ok, a very rough approximation, but this is the internet, I can write any approximation that I want!). In that case H.264 gives you the best of both worlds. I STILL stand by my own critique of H.264 as it relates to our client 🙂
If, however, you propose MJPEG as an alternative, then you should not forget the many static scenes that we see in surveillance (storage rooms, empty hallways with no motion 80% of the time and so on). In those situations it makes absolutely no sense to record a full frame with no reduction in temporal redundancy. Mobotix has a solution for this called MxPEG (if I recall correctly), which is perhaps the motive for the article?
I don’t know if people understand the purpose of the different settings, if the article helps people understand that constant bit rate can be problematic, then I think the article has merit.