Hi Daniel. I would say a smoother flow is more important than resolution.
For now. -Morten man. 4. nov. 2019, 17:39 skrev Noeck <noeck.marb...@gmx.de>: > As others pointed out, this very much depends on what you want to > achieve (besides a small file size). But I try to offer a starting point > for you to try and find your own compromise of size and quality. > > Usually, I would use a resolution of 1920x1080 (HD), but 1280x720 might > be an option to reduce the size. A frame rate of 25 frames per second > could be enough. But with typical codecs you will not get half the file > size by using half the frame rate. So 720p and 25 fps could be a > starting point. What is more important to you: a high resolution or a > smoothly moving image? > > Then the vp9 codec (libvpx-vp9) and opus audio does a good job regarding > bitrate and a high CRF value reduces file size. Just try 32 and have a > look if you can tolerate the quality reduction and file size. > > And only as a last resort go below a 480 resolution and 25 fps. > Audio bitrate is typically much smaller than video and there is not a > log to gain here. But with the opus codec you can go as low as 64kbit/s > if need be. > > Of course there are many more ways to reach a small file size. The > numbers above are in the ball park of what could be reasonable for a > small web-quality video. > > Best, > Daniel > > > > Resolution > > Frame rate > > Color encoding > > Compression/encoding > > Audio bit rate & compression > > (others) > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-user mailing list > firstname.lastname@example.org > https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user > > To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email > ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe". _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list email@example.com https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".