best compromise for web video

[wetpixel 0]

Hey, video gurus -

 

I was wondering what settings you use to export video to web formats? I've played around with realmedia, quicktime movies, and windows media files, and have gotten mixed results.

 

Any tips for a good tradeoff between file size and quality? (movie size, codec, key frames, etc.)

 

-eric

[craig 0]

I am by no means an expert at this. I need to learn a lot more.

 

I used to provide only quicktime files but realized that linux users would never be serviced properly by that.

I haven't been happy with my mpeg results so far, so I decided to provide both quicktime and realvideo.

I've avoided windows media entirely but not for any quality reasons.

 

For quicktime, I use Media Cleaner 5 with the Sorenson 3 codec plus QDesign for audio. Pretty much the standard there. I provide 100k and 400k options for dialup and broadband. I like high resolutions with low frame rates because it helps avoid the postage-stamp look. I believe I currently use 192x144x10fps and 320x240x15fps. I use mono audio at very low bitrates. I believe it is 22.05k, 16kbps and 44.1k, 32kbps. It's a shame to use so much precious bandwidth on the soundtrack. I need to update my quicktime settings and re-encode my videos.

 

For Real, I use the Premiere plugin, although Media Cleaner does those, too. I use the stock settings for dual-ISDN (90k) and "512K DSL/cable". In addition, you need to specify resolution---320x240 and 640x480 for me. I think 640x480 is too agressive, though. All my real files are single stream.

 

My real files are consistently better quality than my QT ones.

 

I've been working some with mpeg4 but nothing to get excited over yet. I recently purchased Sorenson Sqeeze, but so far the quality is surprisingly poor and the control over bitrates just isn't there. I'm very disappointed.

 

Did you settle on a DVD authoring tool, yet?

[markh 0]

Craig,

 

Interesting. I have not uploaded video to webs but have produced a lot of video for clients on an entirely different subject adopting the same principle (producing very lengthy video files on CD, which require heavy compression but not losing quality). For this work (which did not require audio) I used an old Mpeg4 codec (350 x 288) x15fps. This was getting pretty good quality at about 5 meg/min of space. The problem I needed to overcome & is common with web use is COMPATABILITY. This is why I try to stick with MS compatable codecs. I have tried Mpeg 1/2 & whilst the quality is a lot better the file sizes are still pretty huge. The latest Mpeg4 codec (Divx) seems reasonable quality wise but relies on a Divx media player to run.

 

What we need is a compression facility that is multi compatible (without the need of third party media players) i.e. MS user-friendly and keeps files sizes down to a bare minimum i.e realistacally shareable, without quality loss. But if I knew the answers to that one I'd probably be a millionnaire by now.

 

Mark

[craig 0]

Unfortunately, powerplays by the major companies prevent us from having the universal solution we want. Quicktime would be a nice answer if the Sorenson codecs were made available to alternative platforms. The helix client is exactly what we want, but it's too early and is backed by a company with a record of abusing its customers. MS files are OK for windows (and linux) but I don't know about mac. Then there's the MS media player agenda.

 

Of course, mpeg4 is supposed to fix this but I haven't had much luck with it. I also used the pre-mpeg4 MS codecs and have been watching the Divx developments, but as you say, it's the universal client access that's important. One thing we can count on is continued turmoil.

[dudeunderwater 0]

Hi Eric, Media Cleaner is an excellent option! My personal favorites are Windows Media & Quicktime. Both files types will reach most if not just about all computers.

I really like Windows media! It has the BEST video quaility and smaller file size compared to Quicktime.

Here is an example, Check it out!

 

http://www.shellmarinehabitat.com/video.html

 

The files are design for Broadband & Dial ups.

 

Let me know if you have any more questions!

 

Have a good one!!!!

 

Todd

[echeng 0]

Todd -

Thank you!

 

I don't think it is Windows media vs. quicktime that is the question. It's more the codec, frame rate, resolution, etc...

[dudeunderwater 0]

These settings can work for Windows Media or Quicktime codecs. For Broadband, Window size 320 x 240 pixels with a data rate of 200 to 500 Kbits/s (This depends on how long the move is and what size file you target) with a frame rate of 29.97.

For dial up, window size 192 X 144 pixles with a data rate of 50 to 100 Kbits/s with a frame rate of 15 fps. Hope this helps!

 

Todd

[Genesis 0]

The biggest complaint I have with the various CODECS and video formats is that you MUST use each's "proprietary" web server to get video streaming to work - otherwise, it just downloads and THEN plays.

 

Why these folks won't allow this to work properly with nothing more complicated than a HTTP connection is beyond me - there is nothing technically preventing it, other than the vendors desire to demand extortion money for their server code.

[craig 0]

Quicktime allows playback before the download completes. I see no reason to go through the trouble and expense of streaming servers unless you're trying to make a business of it.

 

I easily get much higher resolution than 320x240 with broadband data rates (400-500 for me). I currently encode at 480x360 but use a lower frame rate. Underwater video generally looks fine at 15fps and people enjoy the added resolution it provides. For dialup I try for about 90Kbps. It still too much but I see no point in providing a worthless postage stamp video just because it meets streaming data rate requirements that I'm not doing anyway.

 

I agree that WMV is very good, the best of the bundled formats that Media Cleaner encodes. Real works very well, too, and has the advantage of playing well for Linux users.

[Drew 0]

I use the ON2 codec for Quicktime and it is a better quality codec for QT than Sorenson 3, VP6 is even cleaner. There is less banding, motion detection is better and the overall picture seems sharper and cleaner. The files tend to be 10-20% larger for the same bitrates. The Apple MP4 codec is crap as is the Sorenson version.

I use Media Cleaner 6 or FCP 4 using Compressor.

[luminary 0]

I use the ON2 codec for Quicktime

 

Amusingly, I've got a software development project with them using their newest VP6 codec. I wasn't aware that the decoders were publicly available already? Cool!

[dudeunderwater 0]

scubadru

The Apple MP4 codec is crap as is the Sorenson version.

 

 

I'm glad someone else feels the same way about Apple MP4 and Sorenson

 

 

Todd Richard

www.synergy-productions.com