Thanks riredale,

Yes, I did mean MPEG2.

I had family film and video tape going back to 1948. I digitized it all as avi files and ended up filling up four 250g drives. In a couple of years I hope to be able to get a terabyte drive so I can create a backup!

Right now I want to compress it enough to get it on one computer so I can watch everything without swapping hard drives. I am going with MPEG2 for the moment. I just thought it was curious that MPEG2 compression is about 10 times faster than WMV and wondered if I was doing something wrong or if others had the same experience. Also asking for suggestions on compression formats for this purpose - before I get too far into it.

Thanks,

David

I'm surprised to hear MPEG2 compressing so much faster than WMV. Were they like for like compression ratios?

As Mpeg2 compressors go, Cinemacraft Encoder is the fastest (and arguably the best) if you've got large quantities to get through. The basic version is pretty cheap too.

If I wanted to archive such large amounts of video just to watch for myself I wouldn't use MPEG2. I'd only use it if I wanted to go to DVD. I would look at DivX or WMV at near lossless settings. I can't advise which is better cuz I haven't done the tests!

By the way, if a computer has DVD software installed, then it can play MPEG2 files.

You haven't told us what settings you used on the WMV render? Which template did you use? That makes all the difference.

If you do a WMV render at 250Kbps and 320x240 you'll likely find it will be a pretty quick process... but if you choose 3Mbps and 620x480 it will be much longer.

Interesting stuff guys, thanks.

The WMV files were smaller, perhaps two-thirds the size of the MPEG2 files. Re settings, I clicked the Render button in Vegas and took the default.

My purpose on this project is not to make DVD or create archives. I am only compressing so I can fit a terabyte of AVI onto a 200g harddrive. Within those parameters I am looking for the best quality with acceptable render times.

Thanks

I would also look at trying procoder or procoder express. A very reasonably priced compression software. I use it to go from AVI to WMV and it works at real time plus or minus.

I used it last week to take a wmv file to AVI for editing purposes and it worked well even for that.

Good luck and enjoy the family videos.

I clicked the Render button in Vegas and took the default.

Well that explains a lot.

You also might try compressing to WMV in Windows Media Encoder. It's free. I've never tried using it to go from MPEG-2 to WMV, so I can't speak for the speed.

Thanks again all,

Solocinema , I am going from my archive AVI source to MPEG2. Not MPEG2 to WMV. I'll check Windows Media Encoder. Guess I never thought past Vegas...

Liam_Vegas, I admit I'm a novice at compression protocals. What settings would you suggest?

Mandk , the idea of ~real time is very appealing, especially after the day and a half render on the first video I tried!

David

Vegas also makes excellent Real Media files. Real keeps getting kicked around because of their long past spyware crap, still their file format at HIGHER bitrates then you typical see on the web is really very, very good. Try rendering out something in RM at 1MB compression and I think you'll like the quality and relatively "small" file size is really pretty impressive. Equal to or better then WM9.

Liam_Vegas, I admit I'm a novice at compression protocals. What settings would you suggest?

It's not really about what compression settings I would suggest.. the point (to me) is more about the original question you posed about why it was taking so long to render WMV rather then Mpeg2. WMV is <mostly> used as a web delivery format and as such I normally render using modest bit-rates that are appropriate for web delivery (320x240 at up to 500Kbps)... doing renders at that rate will take a bit longer than MPeg2 but not 10 times longer. BUT if you choose the default WMV settings which give VBR at 1Mbps and keeps the frame size at 720x480 that will result in much longer render times. So for me.. knowing you chose the default template (without really knowing what that meant) explained to me precisely why the render times were so long.

In your case you don't need to view these videos on the web.. so for you quality is far more important than keeping the files small and at a bit-rate compaitible with viewing over the web. So... the default settings may in fact be perfect for your needs... if you can put up with the long render times.

In the original post there is some reference to mpeg2 decoders not being installed on all PCs. Many people don't realize that they can load and play mpeg2 files in their DVD software players in file mode. I'll bet your friend could just associate the mpg extension with his DVD software and be good to go on mpeg2 playback.

I kind of like mpeg2s for a couple of reasons: first you can edit them without rerendering them using an mpeg editor like Mpeg Wisard found at womble.com. Only the transitions and beginning and ending fades are rerendered. That saves all kinds of time when you want to re-edit shrunk footage. You can also add credits, opening titles, background music and voice over tracks without ever rerendering the video using the same editor. This is truly cool! Second, your video is already in the right format to burn to DVD. The video may not be the smallest, but it is very high quality, and it's the re-renders that really kill things both time and quality wise.

A general rule of thumb is that the more compressed the final file is, the more work it takes to get there. Thus, MPEG2 requires a lot more processor time than MPEG1 did, and WMV requires a whole lot more work than MPEG2. The latest, H264, is very slow to encode because it's even more compressed than WMV.

Another rule of thumb is that you want a compression technology that requires the horsepower on the encode end, if possible, so that the decode process can be done by anyone.

mpeg2 is rerenderd if you drop it back in the timeline and add titles and such isnt it??? it doesnt just skim over it.. it re-encodes it.. or so i thought anyway...

BillyBoy, even the newest version of RealPlayer is full of "crap", as you put it. It still has the automatic notification features and no way to disable them. It still configures itself to run in the background all the time by default. It still launches it's scheduling and messaging program on Windows boot. Even if you disable these in msconfig or actually delete them from the drive, they will be reinstalled and renabled the next time RealPlayer is used. Yes, there are ways around them and methods to disable them, but they are not for casual users. This is still a huge load of "crap" that users shouldn't have to deal with.

Real is losing it's presence quickly. Very few people use it anymore. It was good technology but had a lot of bad baggage along with it. Users got smart and abandoned the format for more friendly media players that played nicer with their computers. At this point i consider Real to be a dead-end format and i won't use it because i expect that soon there won't be any support for it anymore.

pjrey: yes, you are correct.

With Vegas that is true. I use Vegas for everything except editing mpeg2 video for this reason. The Womble MPEG Wizard software at womble.com only rerenders what it needs to though: fades, transitions, audio, and filtered video. For this reason it is an extremely quick and high quality way to work with mpeg video. I use it for things like making minor edits to video that I only have on DVD. It can also edit mpeg2 with AC3 audio by the way. When you need to do a minor edit on a DVD this saves you all kinds of time. I found about it on this forum by the way so this isn't really new.

There's a trial period of a month before they ask you to buy it, so I recommend checking it out highly.

If you want to re-edit DVD video, here is what you do:
- copy the main VOB file or files to your hard drive.
- rename them from .vob to .mpg extensions.
- load them in order from MPEG Wizard.
- edit, add titles, replace the audio, add a naration track or whatever.
- save as a new mpeg file.
As long as you don't select a different end format, only the new stuff will be rendered. New audio will be MUXed into the file without rendering the video. The process is about as quick as a file copy because, for the most part, that is exactly what it is! Take the final mpeg2 file and make a new DVD using DVD Architect. The video, except for the transitions, will be exactly the same as before with no re-rendering qualtiy loss. Not only that, but the whole process is extremely quick since hardly anything was rendered!

This is so much better both time and quality wise from doing the same thing in Vegas since Vegas would re-render the entire thing. Again, I use Vegas for absolutely everything except for working with mpeg2 video. For re-editing MPEG video this is a whole lot better.

As we all know, often a DVD copy is all we have to work with when a client comes back with the request for a minor edit like a different spelling in the end credits. With Vegas alone this can be a major pain in the but. Add Womble to the equation and it's as simple as: generate the corrected credits, save as an mpeg2, link the original video mpeg2 and the corrected credits mpeg2 with Womble and burn a new DVD with the joined file. What a time and quality saver!

Interesting that no one mentions mpeg-1. Like pretty well everyone I'd always dismissed it as being strictly low end however two pretty knowledgeable guys have both recently suggested I have another look at it. For very best quality at high bitrates where size isn't quite so much an issue they claim it outperforms MPEG-2. Don't try this with Vegas though, the included mpeg-1 encoder is pretty horrid. They both suggested hardware encoders were the best (if you can afford them) but TMPGEnc has a pretty decent mpeg-1 encoder in it and the mpeg-1 only version is free.
Bob.