Re: [videoblogging] Compression best practices
Yeah. If that's kilobits rather than kilobytes, I guess it would take about 4-5 hours to upload each gigabyte. And I'd imagine that anyone who is very concerned with maximum quality in high resolution is going to want to do it themselves. Or, as Adrian says, people who want to play with compression effects. But for most standard web video purposes, I'd imagine people are going to be distributing approx 10 minute videos - and uploading h264 versions that are already compressed to a few hundred meg or even smaller. And then they'd put in their own personalised settings into Heywatch to transcode to a number of different formats - so this way they spend 15+ mins exporting one file, then 30-45 mins uploading it - then the rest is taken care of for them - instead of spending hours exporting uploading each extra format. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 20-Jul-09, at 2:34 AM, Brook Hinton wrote: Heywatch would be great except... all that time UPLOADING an uncompressed (or dv or whatever you use) file to use as a source. Have to subtract that from the time saved by outsourcing the compression to them. Of course if you have access to really fast uploading that's another matter but even on my deluxe dsl account upload speed maxes out at about 500k. Brook On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Michael Sullivansullele...@gmail.com wrote: Curious, do need to output to wmv or you just want to have every modern format available? On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Adam Quirk qu...@wreckandsalvage.comwrote: Hey all, I've used several compression UIs over the years, but I'm curious to hear what your favorites are, and what your process is. I really like SUPER by Erightsoft (http://www.erightsoft.com/SUPER.html ) but I usually have trouble converting from QT to WMV. Directshow seems to throw a wrench in the gears. I use QT Pro for almost all of my compression, but I'm still hunting for a good WMV solution. Windows Media Encoder isn't an option for me, as it almost always crashes for some reason. Is anyone still using Sorenson Squeeze? What is your process for compressing to all the different formats from your master? Mine: 1. Render uncompressed AVI at 1280x720p 2. Open in QT, Export Movie, h.264 1280x720p 2.5mbps 3. Open in QT, Export for Web, iPhone m4v and iPhone 3gp 4. Open in Super, Export to WMV9 1280x720p 2.5mbps Note: I'm on PC, but if you're on Mac please feel free to share too. Someone else may be interested. Thanks, Adam http://tangent.ws [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- ___ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Compression best practices
But for most standard web video purposes, I'd imagine people are going to be distributing approx 10 minute videos - and uploading h264 versions that are already compressed to a few hundred meg or even smaller. And then they'd put in their own personalised settings into Heywatch to transcode to a number of different formats - so this way they spend 15+ mins exporting one file, then 30-45 mins uploading it - then the rest is taken care of for them - instead of spending hours exporting uploading each extra format. yeah, we're talking hypothetical here. But I can imagine a time when it's important for an organization/creator to keep a online archive that they control through Amazon S3. You export out a DV file, upload the DV file to a service which then compresses it to multiple formats based on your exact specifications. You could do it yourself...but maybe you would have multiple clients which would make the transcoding process too tedious on a weekly basis. Maybe it'd be best for someone who works in a company where you're having to do this everyday. You then have a library of your content online. The costs are certainly affordable these days for storage and bandwidth. This control would be interesting for all kinds of reasons. You would then have the choice to send a client a screener version of a video. Or you could send over the completed DV version. Maybe you set up a site that password protects access to the final videos...so people must pay a fee to download? Interestingly, Markus sent me a cool link: http://aws.amazon.com/importexport/ You can mail harddrives to Amazon...and they'll import all your files to your S3 account. AWS Import/Export accelerates moving large amounts of data into and out of AWS using portable storage devices for transport. AWS transfers your data directly onto and off of storage devices using Amazons high-speed internal network and bypassing the Internet. For significant data sets, AWS Import/Export is often faster than Internet transfer and more cost effective than upgrading your connectivity. Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://jaydedman.com http://twitter.com/jaydedman 917 371 6790 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com mailto:videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Compression best practices
Heywatch would be great except... all that time UPLOADING an uncompressed (or dv or whatever you use) file to use as a source. Have to subtract that from the time saved by outsourcing the compression to them. Of course if you have access to really fast uploading that's another matter but even on my deluxe dsl account upload speed maxes out at about 500k. Brook On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Michael Sullivansullele...@gmail.com wrote: Curious, do need to output to wmv or you just want to have every modern format available? On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Adam Quirk qu...@wreckandsalvage.comwrote: Hey all, I've used several compression UIs over the years, but I'm curious to hear what your favorites are, and what your process is. I really like SUPER by Erightsoft (http://www.erightsoft.com/SUPER.html) but I usually have trouble converting from QT to WMV. Directshow seems to throw a wrench in the gears. I use QT Pro for almost all of my compression, but I'm still hunting for a good WMV solution. Windows Media Encoder isn't an option for me, as it almost always crashes for some reason. Is anyone still using Sorenson Squeeze? What is your process for compressing to all the different formats from your master? Mine: 1. Render uncompressed AVI at 1280x720p 2. Open in QT, Export Movie, h.264 1280x720p 2.5mbps 3. Open in QT, Export for Web, iPhone m4v and iPhone 3gp 4. Open in Super, Export to WMV9 1280x720p 2.5mbps Note: I'm on PC, but if you're on Mac please feel free to share too. Someone else may be interested. Thanks, Adam http://tangent.ws [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- ___ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab
Re: [videoblogging] Compression best practices
one other issue is that for some of us compression is as interesting a creative variable in web video as depth of field, aperture, etc. Sometimes fully auto is good, othertimes you want manual control... On 20/07/2009, at 11:34 AM, Brook Hinton wrote: Heywatch would be great except... all that time UPLOADING an uncompressed (or dv or whatever you use) file to use as a source. Have to subtract that from the time saved by outsourcing the compression to them. Of course if you have access to really fast uploading that's another matter but even on my deluxe dsl account upload speed maxes out at about 500k. cheers Adrian Miles adrian.mi...@rmit.edu.au bachelor communication honours coordinator vogmae.net.au
Re: [videoblogging] Compression best practices
Have you seen: http://heywatch.com/ Web-based online video encoding. It will batch convert to any format, any length, and any resolution including HD. And you can set up your own custom format conversion profiles. It'll distribute your files to wherever you want - CDN, FTP, HTTP and Amazon S3. It will accept videos from sharing sites, URLs and podcast feeds as source files. Id love to hear if anyone has actually used this. We've always spoken of the need for a service that automatically transcodes multiple custom formats for you...and especially interfaces with your own S3 account. They have nice price guide here: http://heywatch.com/page/pricing Let's you say what yu want to do...then spits out a price. Not the cheapest but would be worth it if it was solid. Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://jaydedman.com http://twitter.com/jaydedman 917 371 6790
Re: [videoblogging] Compression best practices
Curious, do need to output to wmv or you just want to have every modern format available? On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Adam Quirk qu...@wreckandsalvage.comwrote: Hey all, I've used several compression UIs over the years, but I'm curious to hear what your favorites are, and what your process is. I really like SUPER by Erightsoft (http://www.erightsoft.com/SUPER.html) but I usually have trouble converting from QT to WMV. Directshow seems to throw a wrench in the gears. I use QT Pro for almost all of my compression, but I'm still hunting for a good WMV solution. Windows Media Encoder isn't an option for me, as it almost always crashes for some reason. Is anyone still using Sorenson Squeeze? What is your process for compressing to all the different formats from your master? Mine: 1. Render uncompressed AVI at 1280x720p 2. Open in QT, Export Movie, h.264 1280x720p 2.5mbps 3. Open in QT, Export for Web, iPhone m4v and iPhone 3gp 4. Open in Super, Export to WMV9 1280x720p 2.5mbps Note: I'm on PC, but if you're on Mac please feel free to share too. Someone else may be interested. Thanks, Adam http://tangent.ws [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Compression best practices
Have you seen: http://heywatch.com/ Web-based online video encoding. I haven't used it yet. Got quite excited about what it says it can do: It will batch convert to any format, any length, and any resolution including HD. And you can set up your own custom format conversion profiles. It'll distribute your files to wherever you want - CDN, FTP, HTTP and Amazon S3. It will accept videos from sharing sites, URLs and podcast feeds as source files. It allows you to do custom watermarking. It has a mobile interface. And it has an API. It costs, but if I measure the time my computer is locked up in compression of different formats, and match that to my hourly rate, it's cheap. Looks like the future to me. If you try it, let us know how it goes. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 14-Jul-09, at 4:00 PM, Adam Quirk wrote: Hey all, I've used several compression UIs over the years, but I'm curious to hear what your favorites are, and what your process is. I really like SUPER by Erightsoft (http://www.erightsoft.com/SUPER.html ) but I usually have trouble converting from QT to WMV. Directshow seems to throw a wrench in the gears. I use QT Pro for almost all of my compression, but I'm still hunting for a good WMV solution. Windows Media Encoder isn't an option for me, as it almost always crashes for some reason. Is anyone still using Sorenson Squeeze? What is your process for compressing to all the different formats from your master? Mine: 1. Render uncompressed AVI at 1280x720p 2. Open in QT, Export Movie, h.264 1280x720p 2.5mbps 3. Open in QT, Export for Web, iPhone m4v and iPhone 3gp 4. Open in Super, Export to WMV9 1280x720p 2.5mbps Note: I'm on PC, but if you're on Mac please feel free to share too. Someone else may be interested. Thanks, Adam http://tangent.ws [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Compression 4x3 16x9 Problem
around the 26/7/07 pettisb mentioned about [videoblogging] Compression 4x3 16x9 Problem that: Normally when I output a full res vid, the movie stays 16x9, but for some reason it's smooshing it into 4x3 so the image is all skinny. Has anyone else had this problem and have a solution I can try? I've already gone in and deleted the imovie plist, to no avail. bak in days when iMovie didn't support 16:9 I used to export qt and then take the 4:3 output through QT compression and set correct size there. worked OK :) -- cheers Adrian Miles this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x] vogmae.net.au [official compliance stuff:] CRICOS provider code: 00122A
Re: [videoblogging] Compression settings make a difference?
Vimeo's recommending Sorensen 3 and QDesign Music 2??? God. What is it 2001?? That's _really_ bad advice! The whole reason that internet video is taking off is because of the maturity of several technologies and the emergence of new tools. Video compression has improved tremendously since the days when Sorensen 3 was the best thing out there. That's Quicktime 5 technology -- and I have no idea why someone would recommend it now. Mpeg-4 compression like freevlog teaches is Quicktime 6 Player compatible. The H-264 codec that Apple is pushing needs Quicktime 7. Use one of these technologies. I use and teach the first. Other people like the second better. There's something to be said for not always using the cutting-edge newest technology because it takes a while for people to upgrade their software. But, hey, Quicktime 6 came out almost four years ago in July 2002. I haven't heard of anyone pushing the Quicktime 5 stuff!!! Sorensen (at settings that download over U.S. high-speed connection speed without waiting) has a lot of compression artifacts, and QDesign Music 2 usually sounds really really bad. In my opinion, that's the _worst_ advice of all -- that's pre-mp3 technology, from back before anyone wanted to compress music digitally because it sounded so bad! It's great you experimented to see which you liked better. Those are important skills to work on -- understanding what's happening and trying out a lot of settings for yourself. Try out mpeg-4 vs. h264, that will be more relevant to today's technology. And whoever runs vimeo should really change that advice! Come-on jen jenSimmons http://www.jensimmons.com On Apr 24, 2006, at 4:43 PM, M. Mart wrote: To edit my videos using iMovie on my Mac I relied on the settings provided by Michael and Ryanne on their great Freevlog.org site. Those settings have served my site well, both in .mov and .wmv formats. Today I read on Vimeo.com’s Upload Guide different recommended settings. Following the Vimeo settings as shown below I reformatted an existing QuickTime video and played them side by side. The Vimeo settings worked well, with the only difference being the Vimeo settings produce a file size of 30.28MB vs 14.95MB for Freevlog. The two of us here differ as to which output is slightly better. Has any one here experimented with the two settings? Do these setting differences affect how videos appear in the browser? Vimeo.com: Under Video, click Settings. Compression Type: Sorensen Video 3. Frame rate: Current fps. Key Frames: Every 60 frames. Data rate: Restrict to 1200 kbits/sec. Quality: Best. Under Sound, click Settings. Format: QDesign Music 2 Channels: Stereo (L R) Rate: 44.100. Click Options and set the bitrate to 48kbits/s. Freevlog.org Compression MPEG-4 Rate frame: 15 Key Frames: 5 Compressor at: Medium Data Rate: 600 kbits Sound AAC Mono Bite Rate 24 kilohertz SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS ▪ Visit your group videoblogging on the web. ▪ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ▪ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Compression settings make a difference?
Here are some differences and things to note about these settings:1. The Vimeo settings, I'm sure, work well as you say but - Sorenson 3 is an older, less effecient codec. This is why you noted similar quality at 2X the bit rate. 2. QDesign Music 2 audio codec often sounds very tin can and swirly to me. Also it's much less effecient than AAC.3. The mpeg4 video codec and AAC audio codec settings we show at Freevlog will give you iPod compatible video. Sorenson 3 and QDesign Music 2 are not compatible with the iPod. 4. Apple's version of the mpeg4 codec is certainly not the greatest. You can increase the quality (like with every codec) by increasing the bit rate from what we recommed in the tutorial.5. Another option is to use the h.264 codec but there are some downsides: Apple took away the ability of using h.264 to make ipod compatible videos except when using export to iPod, which last time I checked, had the effect of squishing you video if it originates as DV; also h.264 requires QT7; and h.264 plays poorly on older computers.6. Personally, my perferred option is to use the 3ivx version of the mpeg4 codec ($20 from 3ivx.com - but the free trial lasts forever). We have a tutorial on Freevlog for using the single pass version: URL: http://freevlog.org/index.php/2005/10/23/compress-for-the-web-with-3ivx/ and one of these days I'll get around to making a tutorial for using the dual-pass version which gives results close to those of h.264. The reason why we don't already have that tutorial is that there is a bug with 3ivx dual pass and QT 7. There is an easy workaround (I use it all the time) that can be found here: URL: http://forums.3ivx.com/index.php?s=e927e67253f3bec43952d568e6e99b7cshowtopic=83898st=0p=416725#entry416725 Hope that helps,VerdiOn 4/24/06, M. Mart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To edit my videos using iMovie on my Mac I relied on the settings provided by Michael and Ryanne on their great Freevlog.org site. Those settings have served my site well, both in .mov and .wmv formats. Today I read on Vimeo.com's Upload Guide different recommended settings. Following the Vimeo settings as shown below I reformatted an existing QuickTime video and played them side by side. The Vimeo settings worked well, with the only difference being the Vimeo settings produce a file size of 30.28MB vs 14.95MB for Freevlog. The two of us here differ as to which output is slightly better. Has any one here experimented with the two settings? Do these setting differences affect how videos appear in the browser? Vimeo.com: Under Video, click Settings. Compression Type: Sorensen Video 3. Frame rate: Current fps. Key Frames: Every 60 frames. Data rate: Restrict to 1200 kbits/sec. Quality: Best. Under Sound, click Settings. Format: QDesign Music 2 Channels: Stereo (L R) Rate: 44.100. Click Options and set the bitrate to 48kbits/s. Freevlog.org Compression MPEG-4 Rate frame: 15 Key Frames: 5 Compressor at: Medium Data Rate: 600 kbits Sound AAC Mono Bite Rate 24 kilohertz SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group videoblogging on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service . -- Me: http://michaelverdi.comRD: http://evilvlog.comLearn to videoblog: http://freevlog.orgLearn to videoblog in person: http://node101.org SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Compression...
Yeah... this is the videoblogging group... everyone wants to know... what is the cocktail! I am bleeping lost!!! Nahtan Miller www.bicycle-sidewalk.com Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Compression...
Did you change the title of this post from Rocketboom in widescreen? to Compression... If you did, by doing that it makes the content of your email hard to decipher. By reading your question, in context with what I think is the post you are referring to, you are asking for more information on today's Rocketboom. Am I right or totally off base? On Feb 21, 2006, at 12:36 PM, Nathan Miller wrote: Yeah... this is the videoblogging group... everyone wants to know... what is the cocktail! I am bleeping lost!!! Nahtan Miller www.bicycle-sidewalk.com Yahoo! Groups Links --Steve -- http://SteveGarfield.com http://Rocketboom.com My most recent post: VLOG SOUP: Episode 11 http://stevegarfield.blogs.com/videoblog/2006/02/vlog_soup_episo.html You are worth like 50 million danishes. - Amy Carpenter Alternative reply address: stephen.garfield [AT] comcast.net Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Compression...
Sorry... Yes I did change the title... and my language was a blur I want to to know the cocktail for big RB show... or just this...if anyhow has a hint... I work in FCP... how do I get a 10 to 12 min bicycle sidewalk under 50MB!! IF you can work this I will hook up up!! --- Steve Garfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you change the title of this post from Rocketboom in widescreen? to Compression... If you did, by doing that it makes the content of your email hard to decipher. By reading your question, in context with what I think is the post you are referring to, you are asking for more information on today's Rocketboom. Am I right or totally off base? On Feb 21, 2006, at 12:36 PM, Nathan Miller wrote: Yeah... this is the videoblogging group... everyone wants to know... what is the cocktail! I am bleeping lost!!! Nahtan Miller www.bicycle-sidewalk.com Yahoo! Groups Links --Steve -- http://SteveGarfield.com http://Rocketboom.com My most recent post: VLOG SOUP: Episode 11 http://stevegarfield.blogs.com/videoblog/2006/02/vlog_soup_episo.html You are worth like 50 million danishes. - Amy Carpenter Alternative reply address: stephen.garfield [AT] comcast.net Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Compression...
Nathan Miller wrote: I work in FCP... how do I get a 10 to 12 min bicycle sidewalk under 50MB!! IF you can work this I will hook up up!! The answer is... wait for it... Compression! Just like it says in the subject line. What have you tried so far? MPEG-4? 3ivx? where to start... Pete -- http://tinkernet.org/ videoblog for the future... Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] compression streaming settings in fcp
You actually are not going to make the video for streaming -- you want to create it for progressive download. Streaming technology will not work with FireANT, video ipod, etc. Streaming works by loading only a few frames into the viewer's computer, letting them watch those frames, and then clearly them from the memory right away. The viewer can't save the film. It streams right through the machine, like a creek... where progressive download is like a water bucket. Which do you want to drink from?? Streaming is great for live events -- if you want people to watch your speech while you are giving it, live, you can't do progressive download. (what, save the whole film, compress it and have people download it before the event is over??? You could only do that with a time machine.) Also, to do streaming, you have to have a server that is configured properly to serve up the files -- which is a whole thinga-ma-thing. Here's an example of movie that streams -- http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/specialeventoct05/ See how the controls are different?? (oh, wait, in QT7 the controls look the same... well, it behaves differently. You can jump ahead in the film very easily, but you have to wait for the streaming to catch up. You can't rewind or go forward frame by frame... that's because the whole thing is never in your machine.) Anyway, to answer your question: I would like to set it for internet streaming, but, my question is, which option should I choose: a) fast start b) fast start compressed header c) hinted streaming Fast start turns on the progressive part of progressive download, letting people watch the film while it's still downloading it. Without this turned on, the viewer looks at the blue Q waiting waiting waiting (wondering if it's broken or not) until the whole file it downloaded, then they can watch it. (Yuk). If you click fast start they can watch it right away. Fast start compressed header squishes the very beginning of the movie, so that it loads even faster and makes it more likely that the movie will start playing right away. This means the quality of the beginning will be lower. It's a trade-off of quality for speed. I think this may not be so necessary anymore now that internet connections are faster and compression is so much better than it use to be, but it's something to play with and make a personal choice about. So either a or b works. Don't do c. jen jenSimmons http://www.emergingawareness.org http://www.inclinationsthemovie.com http://www.jensimmons.com On Nov 28, 2005, at 8:53 PM, Richard Show wrote: I've started using final cut pro and I set up the compression as suggested in FreeVlog, which worked great, except they never mentioned anything about the streaming option, and, as a consequence, I uploaded a video that didn't have it and it confused people trying to download. (Don't get me wrong, freevlog rules!, and, in fact, maybe I just spaced the streaming part out) ... anyway ... ... thanks in advance ... Richard -- Richard http://www.richardshow.com SPONSORED LINKS Individual Fireant Typepad Use YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS ▪ Visit your group videoblogging on the web. ▪ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ▪ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Compression techniques - file size ratios
I'm not sure about your compression figuers, but QT7 is now available for Windows. Also vlc (http://www.videolan.org) has experimental support for H.264 although I guess that's not really ready for prime time by definition. -mOn 11/9/05, Will [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After numerous attempts of trying different compression settings an codecs - I ended up with a with a 19.8 mb file that was 5 minutes long. This works out to about 4mb/minute. I was wondering if this is a common size for a file this long? Is there any stats out there on what kind of compression ratios vodcasters are using? My final version was compressed using 3ivx - dual pass. I had orginally had the size down to 11 mb using h.264 with the same quality but I discovered that only QT 7 could play this - which ruled out a lot users. BTW - any windows users that couldn't see the inaugural version of tiny tube because of the QT7 can now view it. Will http://www.tiny-tube.com SPONSORED LINKS Individual Fireant Use YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group videoblogging on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. -- -mhttp://www.secretelite.com/michael SPONSORED LINKS Individual Fireant Use YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
RE: [videoblogging] compression
Hi everybody, I hope this is not inappropriate. I am looking for free (not trial versions but real free) compression tools a) for powerpoint where I include soundfiles and b) for video files I made with windows movie maker for example and a webcam. (or other free tools which can caption webcams) I am moving into doing lot of teaching long distance webcam and /or powerpoint both with voice but I try to get a file of the presentation as a backup to people per e-mail in case like webcam connections don't work... Can you clarify what you mean by compression tools? Windows Movie Maker outputs compressed format WMV files at a wide variety of quality levels depending on what your needs are in terms of resolution and file size. You can even set a specific file size target and let the software automatically output a file at the target size in MB. PowerPoint is a little more complicated because the files tend to be bloated to begin with. You can conserve a ton of space simply by using a high compression setting in a zip application. If you are outputting an video presentation from PowerPoint, your can get a compressed video file by using Microsoft Producer instead of creating a compiled PowerPoint deck. The other option here would be to purchase one of the many $30 apps specifically designed to compress PP files. Jake Ludington http://www.mediablab.com http://www.podcastingstarterkit.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back! http://us.click.yahoo.com/T8sf5C/tzNLAA/TtwFAA/lBLqlB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] compression
Dear Jake, thanks 1) in regards to windows movie maker if one wants a decent quality the compression ends up 1MB per minute which is not good enough as talks/lectures tend to be around 45 minutes one can safe on the level of a dial up but there the webcam quality is pretty bad 2) regarding powerpoint yes there are a few powerpoint compressiontools but you still have to pay I look for a totally free one I will look into the producer option ZIPs by now are increasingly problematic as many e-mail recipients filter them out. Like my university sees every zip file as a virus threat and they don't come to my inbox. As I work with many in developing countries the ones I deal with have a computer but they don't have money to buy all kind of software. and I often have to do multi outputs as sometimes I have blind people in the audience sometimes deaf people (that why I have the powerpoint and use the audio to describe what is on the powerpoint). Is open office better sizewise ? Not all of them have fast internet access so webcam is often not an option. But in general I found MSN messenger 7.0 work very nicely to give presentations but for the webcam fast internet access is needed. I might be naive here again if this is inappropriate just ignore it THanks Gregor Jake Ludington wrote: PowerPoint is a little more complicated because the files tend to be bloated to begin with. You can conserve a ton of space simply by using a high compression setting in a zip application. If you are outputting an video presentation from PowerPoint, your can get a compressed video file by using Microsoft Producer instead of creating a compiled PowerPoint deck. The other option here would be to purchase one of the many $30 apps specifically designed to compress PP files. Jake Ludington http://www.mediablab.com http://www.podcastingstarterkit.com Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back! http://us.click.yahoo.com/T8sf5C/tzNLAA/TtwFAA/lBLqlB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [videoblogging] compression
1) in regards to windows movie maker if one wants a decent quality the compression ends up 1MB per minute which is not good enough as talks/lectures tend to be around 45 minutes Reasonable people differ on what qualifies as decent. :) About the only way to reduce the file size further for dial up users is to decrease the resolution. Drop to 160x120 and you dramatically decrease the file size. The other option might be to cut the frame rate to 15fps, which will make motion choppy but does decrease file size. You might be able to save a few megabytes by using a MPEG-4 codec (DivX/XviD) after exporting from Windows Movie Maker. one can safe on the level of a dial up but there the webcam quality is pretty bad 2) regarding powerpoint yes there are a few powerpoint compressiontools but you still have to pay I look for a totally free one I don't know of any. I don't think there are any because the person willing to spend $200-400 for a version of Office with PowerPoint probably isn't going to balk at $30 for some compression. ZIPs by now are increasingly problematic as many e-mail recipients filter them out. Like my university sees every zip file as a virus threat and they don't come to my inbox. Hosting the files and linking to a .zip is almost never filtered by email. As I work with many in developing countries the ones I deal with have a computer but they don't have money to buy all kind of software. and I often have to do multi outputs as sometimes I have blind people in the audience sometimes deaf people (that why I have the powerpoint and use the audio to describe what is on the powerpoint). Is open office better sizewise ? Open Office and virtually every other office product will result in even more bloat. Apple's Keynote is worse than PowerPoint in this regard, if that's possible. Couldn't you do video as one output for blind and deaf people and include subtitling (and/or use an overlay of text) to avoid needing many formats? Maybe I'm not looking at the issue correctly, but if a blind person clicks on a video file, they still hear the audio track and a deaf person would get the visual experience with subtitles. Not all of them have fast internet access so webcam is often not an option. But in general I found MSN messenger 7.0 work very nicely to give presentations but for the webcam fast internet access is needed. You keep referring to a Webcam here and I'm not sure I'm following that part of it. On one hand you are talking about recording video and outputting something from Windows Movie Maker. Here you mention using a Webcam for (I assume) live video streaming? Is this a separate project or are the two related and I'm just not getting it? :) Jake Ludington http://www.mediablab.com http://www.podcastingstarterkit.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back! http://us.click.yahoo.com/T8sf5C/tzNLAA/TtwFAA/lBLqlB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Compression
Hi Bev, Check out the tutorials at: http://freevlog.org/#compress Sounds like you want the one for iMovie (even if you're not using iMovie - the QuickTime part will be the same). -- Verdi http://michaelverdi.com http://freevlog.org http://graymattergravy.com On Aug 17, 2005, at 11:24 AM, BevSykes wrote: Hi there. I'm new to the group, new to vlogging, and am trying to figure out what I'm doing. My most pressing question is about file size. I just downloaded one of the reports from Rocketboom, which is 4+ minutes long and 20 MB in size in Quicktime. I recorded something not quite as long yesterday, in Quicktime and it was 120 MB in size. I recently upgraded to Quicktime7 Pro and tried its video compression utility where it efficiently converted a 20 MB file to a 46 MB file--isn't the compression supposed to go in the OTHER direction I know that I don't have 1/1000th the expertise you guys do and don't expect to actually contribute much to the discussion, but I'm hoping to learn from you, and if I can just get the file size to be reasonable, I'll be a happy camper. At present I'm uploading things to OurMedia and so far haven't had enough problem to think about moving to a pay site (and until I actually produce something that's worth seeing, OurMedia seems to suit my practice videos just fine). I'm one of those senior citizens, like Steve Garfield's mom (though not quite that old), who is trying to figure out the new technology. Thanks for your help. Bev Sykes YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group videoblogging on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. SPONSORED LINKS Individual Fireant Explains YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Compression
I hadactually checked out that tutorial and have done some compression in WindowsMedia (cumbersome because I have to convert from .mov, which comes from my camera, to .avi so that it can be read in Windows Media. That compression works but the files are then .wmv files and I note that, at least Our Media, seems to prever Quicktime (.mov). (Though I've just checked blip.tv and see that the preferred format seems to be .wmv) -Bev - Original Message - From: Michael Verdi To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 8:32 AM Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Compression Hi Bev,Check out the tutorials at: http://freevlog.org/#compressSounds like you want the one for iMovie (even if you're not using iMovie - the QuickTime part will be the same).--Verdihttp://michaelverdi.comhttp://freevlog.orghttp://graymattergravy.comOn Aug 17, 2005, at 11:24 AM, BevSykes wrote: Hi there. I'm new to the group, new to vlogging, and am trying to figure out what I'm doing. My most pressing question is about file size. I just downloaded one of the reports from Rocketboom, which is 4+ minutes long and 20 MB in size in Quicktime. I recorded something not quite as long yesterday, in Quicktime and it was 120 MB in size. I recently upgraded to Quicktime7 Pro and tried its video compression utility where it efficiently converted a 20 MB file to a 46 MB file--isn't the compression supposed to go in the OTHER direction I know that I don't have 1/1000th the expertise you guys do and don't expect to actually contribute much to the discussion, but I'm hoping to learn from you, and if I can just get the file size to be reasonable, I'll be a happy camper. At present I'm uploading things to OurMedia and so far haven't had enough problem to think about moving to a pay site (and until I actually produce something that's worth seeing, OurMedia seems to suit my practice videos just fine). I'm one of those senior citizens, like Steve Garfield's mom (though not quite that old), who is trying to figure out the new technology. Thanks for your help. Bev Sykes YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Compression
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Aloha e Bev! Neat to see your name in this group. Welcome to videoblogging! And hang in there. Video has its quirks, but with the folks on this list, you get the hang of it pretty quickly. FWIW, even when I was on a PC, I preferred Quicktime as a format, and yeah, the fact that it was the native format of my camera helped. When I got started, I used the instructions and aggressive compression settings recommended here: http://www.infodesign.no/artikler/Videoblog_with_Blogger_211004.html#c ompressing And also found some guidance on editing here: http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/desktopvogging/desktopvogging.html Looking forward to your first published video! Ryan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 8.1 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com Comment: http://www.lightfantastic.org/pgp.txt iQA+AwUBQwN/i8/o8udD/KcXEQKLNACWJfxGd+QY0saibJdrz0KogI/XxgCg1CZd qxAl0YS4cht5R3TM5XKyucA= =p7H3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- SPONSORED LINKS Individual Fireant Explains YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [videoblogging] Compression for Animation?
What kind of animation? Is it traditional animation, Flash, 3D, claymation, something else? Typically you can compress animation more than live action video and still get decent results. You could probably drop the frame rate to 10-12 fps too and save a bit more in filesize. But, it really depends on the kind of animation and the amount of pixel difference between frames. -Josh On 8/6/05, James A. Donnelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone have any thoughts about proper compression for animations? I used the standard ones that are listed here, and on freevlog... but the animations come out absolutely crappy! There is to much information to encode, thus it looks blurry and fuzzy. basically they only look decent with very little compression or none. ugh. your thoughts, jad www.dummycast.com (vblog) www.madpod.com (podcast) www.madlymedia.com www.moonvideo.com Yahoo! Groups Links YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
