OT: Best format for streaming HD?

goshep wrote on 10/7/2007, 4:56 PM
I know it has already been discussed but my topic search is yielding few results. What is the best render setting/codec for streaming HD? DivX looks great but the biggest complaint I recall is the need to download and install the codec to view DivX video. I want to be able to store and stream many (fifty or more per month) HD videos from a website. The videos will be 3-5 minutes in length and need to be large enough to view without placing one's face against the monitor to see. I'll be hosting from my own website so the only storage/bandwidth limitations are those of my web hosting provider. Is DivX becoming mainstream enough to use? Or will I be creating a huge headache for the viewer (and ultimately me)? The demographic is sure to include seniors who are barely comfortable on a computer, let alone chasing down codecs.

I've noticed HD movie trailers are delivered via Quicktime but I don't know how large the files are.

Thanks as always.

Comments

Terry Esslinger wrote on 10/7/2007, 5:24 PM
I just bought an instructional DVD from Vasst about making video for web delivery and they are recommending Flash - namly On2Flix
Stuart Robinson wrote on 10/7/2007, 5:46 PM
When you say "stream", do you really mean stream or are you talking about a progressive download? If the former, you'll need a streaming server.
MH_Stevens wrote on 10/7/2007, 5:55 PM
When you say streaming HD you mean streaming video from an HD source? I don't think you can stream at HD resolution - can you? The Flash solution is very low res is it not?

goshep wrote on 10/7/2007, 6:08 PM
Ah yes, I recall there being some confusion in another thread about streaming. Truthfully, I am no less confused now than I was then but I assume it is progressive downloading and not true streaming. In either case, I'm looking for the best quality and compatibility. Flash, while certainly compatible, isn't going to cut the mustard in terms of quality, I don't think (unless there are vast improvements someone is aware of).
John_Cline wrote on 10/7/2007, 6:23 PM
I run quite a few 960x540 "HD" Flash clips hosted on a private portion of my web site. They were all compressed with On2 FlixPro using the VP6 codec at 1 to 2mbps and look remarkably good and stream well to cable modems and most DSL connections. The audio is 128k MP3. I even have a couple of clips at 1280x720 at 3mbps that look pretty good. The point is HD can be delivered over the net. I'm not running any sort of dedicated streaming server, so I guess technically, it's progressive download. Nevertheless, you click on it and it plays with virtually no delay.

I was out at Eclipse Aviation here in Albuquerque shooting interviews of the CEO for a television network in Europe. Eclipse Aviation has developed and is shipping the Model 500, a new class of business jet known as a "VLJ" (Very Light Jet.) While I was out there, I happen to catch their new, somewhat secret, "Eclipse Concept Jet" leaving the hangar for a test flight. (It's a damn cute single-engine, 4-seat, personal jet.) Anyway, I grabbed my HDV camera and ran outside and shot some (shakey) footage. I posted this clip on my web site in 960x540 Flash 8 format. You can try it out here:

http://www.johncline.com/eclipse.htm

I don't have an overabundance of monthly alloted bandwidth on my web site, so I'd appreciate it if this link didn't get distributed outside of the Vegas forum community. In case you do view the clip, let me know how well this clip plays on your machines and what kind of Internet connection you're using.

John
Laurence wrote on 10/7/2007, 6:24 PM
Many people talk about "streaming video" when they actually mean "progressive download". YouTube for instance is progressive download. Streaming refers to media that is played as it "streams" and is never actually downloaded to any storage device on your computer. Progressive download is played as it is downloaded and while it is still an immediate playback experience, the technology is different.

As was pointed out, streaming video is quite expensive and usually needs to be set up by a company that specializes in streaming media, whereas progressive download can be set up easily on any hosting service that has enough allotted bandwidth.

Streaming is better for applications where you really want to control the viewer's experience. An example of this would be when you want to make sure they can't bypass an ad at the beginning. For most of us however, progressive download is the way to go.
Laurence wrote on 10/7/2007, 6:28 PM
On2 flash video gives you good quality video with a high level of compatibility. The quality can be scaled up or down depending on how much bandwidth you are able to allocate to the video being shown.

I prefer the look of wmv right now. I can get better quality at a given bandwidth and the compatabilty is very high.

Flash video quality is quite good, but it is not quite as good as wmv, Quicktime or DivX right now. People use it because of the high level of compatability. Because of this, Flash is being updated to work with h.264 compression. Once this happens, it should be as good quality wise as the other options while maintaining it's edge in compatability. Many of us expect that this will be the best of the video delivery options in the near future.
goshep wrote on 10/7/2007, 6:38 PM
John,

I took a look at Flix Pro. Are you creating an AVI in Vegas and exporting to Flix? They offer a few different options, I want to be sure I'm looking at a Vegas compatible work flow. I assume this format is compatible with Flash, so anyone viewing a clip won't have to download anything as long as they already have Flash player installed?
Do you have any demo clips you'd be willing to post? There are no samples on the On2 website. Is the quality close to DivX? If it gets me close to what I'm seeing on Stage6 and there are no additional player downloads necessary, I may be sold.

EDIT
Just read your post Laurence..thank you
Laurence wrote on 10/7/2007, 7:14 PM
One thing that people don't talk about much when evaluating video delivery formats is the wide difference between CPU requirements. DivX is by far the most CPU friendly. I have an old 1 gigahertz P3 which is especially horrible because it is not properly ventilated and drops down to an even lower speed when it is driven hard. Amazingly, with this POS, I can still view 720p HD video online at Stage6 at full quality. Wmv is not quite this good, but it is a close second. Quicktime drops all kinds of frames on a slow PC, but it is still better than Flash. Flash video encoded with the On2 Flix Pro encoder is like a slow slideshow on this same machine.

PCs are so fast these days that most people don't even notice this kind of thing anymore, but it is quite a big deal if you are sending video to parts of the world where they are still using older technology.