If I go to your feedburner feed in a browser, I get an fee dunavailable error:
'HTTP Error Code: 500 Detail: There was a problem retrieving the feed: Error getting URL: 502 - Source feed is too large' I dont know much about feeedburner, maybe it has a maximum size of page it will parse, and you have too many posts on your blog front page? As regards framerate affecting size of files, Clint isnt wrong, its just that its only true with certain encoding methods, and depends what other paramters you tweak. For example if you use an encoder and settings that demand the encoder sticks to the bitrate you specify, then other factors wont change filesize. If I told it to encode at a constant 600kbits/sec, then it doesnt matter what framerate or resolution I use, the filesize should still be about the same. Its got no choice but to stick to the given bitrate range, so if it has twice as many frames to deal with, then it will have to compress them twice a much, rather than give you a file thats twice as big. So for example I have a 25fps clip encoded with H264, and the same clip but at 50fps. The filesize is the same because of how I told it to encode. But as explained a few days ago, something like 3ivx has different modes, many of them just use the bitrate you specify as a maximum, and many of them are variable-bitrate. Even when described as constant tbitrate, theres still a difference between average bitrate and maximum bitrate within the video. To get a better undersatnding of variable bitrates, and to see how much different sorts of video scenes make use of bitrate, you can get software that analyses the video file and shows you a graph of bitrate over time. This is the sort of thing that is done when DVDs are encoded, someone will look at especially complex scenes and optimise various settings for that part of the movie, or at least make sure that the encoder has done the best job on the scene automatically. I can see why you want to use such low framerates due to the length of the footage you are publishing. Because you are using such low framerates, you may find that there are completely different encoding choices which are most suitable for your material. For example some of the ability of certain codecs to compress video to small sizes, is due to optimisation in recording the differences between each frame, rather than the full contents of each frame. If you only have 1 frame a second, there is likely to be more difference between each frame than if there were 15 frames per second. So you wont benefit so much from that type of compression, wheras when I do stuff at 50fps I am getting a lot of benefit from this stuff. So for all I know mpeg4 might not even be the best sort of compression for 1 or 2 fps stuff, maybe a jpeg compression type codec would be better for example. The other issue is that your audio samplerate will be so much higher than your video rate, that more of your filesize is probably due to the audio track than the video track, so you want to pay extra attention to audio compression. Steve of Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Kunga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > FWIW - I just finished encoding another long 52.5 minute > presentation. Used a new Panther 10.3.9 + QT 6.5.2 + 3ivx 4.5.1 Dual > Pass setup with FCP 4.5 from Canon XL-1 DV source. The image quality > is great even in QT 6.5.2. > > When I used 5 fps the file size came out to 116.6 MB which I decided > is unnecessarily large. When I dropped it down to 1 fps the size is > 54 MB. But that frequency of 1 fps is just a little too slow between > images - missing some of my screen shots a few too many times. So I > tried 2 fps. Size is up to 75.1 MB. So Clint Sharp's theory that 1 > fps size can be maintained by changing other parameters seems to me > to not hold up. I hesitate to put out the 75 MB version. That is 22 > MBs extra for a little motion that is not necessary for this video. > > So I'm sticking with the 1 fps system for long verbal presentations > with slides. I don't want to flood my subscribers with files larger > than they absolutely positively need to be to communicate all the info. > > And this will be my first triple post effort. Ripped an mp3 32kbps > file that is only 12 MB. So that will be for my audience's iPods. And > a small PDF just to make it easier for them to hit the links. > > New problem - my post doesn't show up in iTunes. Can anyone tell me > how I can post video and not have it show up in iTunes? It doesn't > show up in FireANT either. But it did and does show up in NetNewsWire > immediately. > -- > Taylor Barcroft > New Media Publisher, Editor, Video Journalist, Video Podcaster > Santa Cruz CA, Beach of the Silicon Valley > URL http://FutureMedia.org > RSS http://feeds.feedburner.com/FutureMedia > iTunes http://tinyurl.com/8ql87 > > On Sep 9, 2005, at 10:28 AM, Steve Watkins wrote: > > > Im delighted to hear you are planning a knowledgebase, because these > > encoding issues get complex and theres plenty to say on the subject. I > > reckon on average I spend at least a few hours every week talking > > about various encoding issues, usually in response to specific > > questions. ------------------------ 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/
