Please help with suggestions for (clip)

craftech wrote on 4/26/2006, 10:31 AM
I finally have to do some Windows media for a client so I am looking for some suggestions as to settings, etc.

I am using a 2 minutes and 8 second clip typical of outdoor theatre for testing purposes:

The first version is low-rez and looks it to me.
320x240 at 262 kbps Quality VBR, 29.97 fps, 22KHz Stereo and a file size of 4.23MB

Low-Rez WMV

The second is high-rez and looks better, but not great (to my eyes) and the file size is of course larger.
320x240 CBR (2-pass) 30 fps, 1000kbps, 44KHZ Stereo CBR, with a file size of around 17MB

Hi-Rez WMV

Here is what the Hi-Rez deteriorates to when encoded in Flash 8 by three different websites:

Vimeo

Photobucket

Google Video



What do you suggest I do to improve the video or am I doing it the most efficient way already?

I don't know if 17MB is too large or if I can get better quality than I did from smaller file sizes. This is new to me.

And for all the talk about Flash 8 it looks absolutely horrendous to me. Besides the deterioration in resolution and the artifacts the video darkens in every case.

Thanks in advance for the feedback.

John






Comments

Former user wrote on 4/26/2006, 10:35 AM
How important is the file size (meaning is this for a website or a CD distribution)?

You could cut the framerate to 20fps or 15fps. Won't help file size but each frame will be higher quality.

Dave T2
craftech wrote on 4/26/2006, 10:37 AM
How important is the file size (meaning is this for a website or a CD distribution)?
==========
It is for her website.

Won't cutting the framerate cause a problem with the dancing?

John
Former user wrote on 4/26/2006, 10:52 AM
"Won't cutting the framerate cause a problem with the dancing?"

There is going to have to be a tradeoff for the file size you need for the website. You would need to do a test to see if the dancing is too jumpy. Many videos online use less than normal framerate to boost quality.

Dave T2
craftech wrote on 4/26/2006, 11:05 AM
Many videos online use less than normal framerate to boost quality.
=======
Thanks Dave. I didn't know that. I'll give that a try.

How does the video clip look otherwize?
Any other suggestions for improving it?
Any changes to the audio for example or the use of two-pass CBR for the video?

John
winrockpost wrote on 4/26/2006, 3:15 PM
John ,I can only see the hi rez version , get a message on the low rez
"vegas users.com does not support external linking directly to media files"

Dave
johnmeyer wrote on 4/26/2006, 3:59 PM
Try changing Mode: to "Bit rate VBR (Peak)" and see if you like the results any better. Keep your resolution the same (320x240) and the bitrate at 262, so you can compare both file size and quality. I have gotten much better results with this encoding.

You can also crop the video and then us a non-standard encoding ratio so you don't waste bits encoding black borders (although this may not be a problem with your video -- I wasn't able to get the links in your initial post to work). Here is a link to some video I captured from a free DirecTV broadcast last night and sent to my daughter (she's away at college). The link is good for six more days:

Music Video

This was encoded at 400 x 232 (because the source was broadcast 4:3, but letterboxed). I used Bit Rate VBR (Peak) with an Average bitrate of 500K and a Peak bitrate of 1.95M, and a peak buffer size of 20. I set the Video Rendering Quality to "Best," although I don't think this was necessary and probably didn't make any difference. The source was captured from the analog outputs on my sat receiver, via my camcorder. I then encoded directly from the 720x480 DV AVI file.

Like you, I am still not that thrilled with the quality, but it is certainly better than what I was getting with the default settings. I should also mention that even the original DV AVI file isn't that great looking -- DirecTV's compression artifacts just keep getting worse and worse. It's one reason I haven't been compelled to invest in a big-time HD system -- I figure they'll just screw up the picture over time, the same way they have done with SD satellite.



craftech wrote on 4/26/2006, 4:26 PM
John ,I can only see the hi rez version , get a message on the low rez
"vegas users.com does not support external linking directly to media files"

Dave
===============
Dave,
I didn't know Kelly didn't allow linking. I only put it up there to post this.
Please click on it again. I put the Low-Rez version up on Vimeo.

Photobucket's tags are screwed up

Google says the flash video is ready for viewing, yet is unavailable.

Either way, all three flash videos look like the Vimeo flash link.

John
craftech wrote on 4/26/2006, 4:32 PM
Try changing Mode: to "Bit rate VBR (Peak)" and see if you like the results any better. Keep your resolution the same (320x240) and the bitrate at 262, so you can compare both file size and quality. I have gotten much better results with this encoding.

You can also crop the video and then us a non-standard encoding ratio so you don't waste bits encoding black borders (although this may not be a problem with your video -- I wasn't able to get the links in your initial post to work).
============
John,

If you get a chance, please click on the links again. I changed the Low-Rez link which was done almost as you suggested.

Is that how it is supposed to look at Low-Rez?

John

I viewed the video you linked. I see what you mean about the quality.
Thanks
johnmeyer wrote on 4/26/2006, 4:53 PM
John,

That link works fine.

The video is all "herky-jerky." I even downloaded it and played it from my own hard disk just to make sure I wasn't seeing some sort of streaming artifact. As you will see if you download my clip, the frame rate is quite smooth.

I used to see this all the time with the older versions of Vegas [you are using Vegas 4, as I remember :) ]. My workaround back then was to use Real Video which produced MUCH better results (although not as many people have the player, and many people object to the crass in-your-face commercialism of the Real Player).

I know you want to stay with Vegas 4. Given that, you might be able to download the demo version of Vegas 6 and use the wmfplug3.dll from that (although there may be other DLLs involved as well). I still have Vegas 4 installed and the version on that DLL is 1.0.0.261. The version of the same DLL in Vegas 6 is 1.0.0.2966.

Thus, I am 99% certain that the problem is entirely with the older WMV encoder included with that version of Vegas. Therefore, if my proposed hack above doesn't work, another solution (besides encoding in Real Video) is to use Microsoft's own encoder: Microsoft WMV Encoder

P.S. I loved the play. You do a good job capturing the video and getting around all the stage lighting problems.
craftech wrote on 4/26/2006, 5:22 PM
I know you want to stay with Vegas 4. Given that, you might be able to download the demo version of Vegas 6 and use the wmfplug3.dll from that (although there may be other DLLs involved as well). I still have Vegas 4 installed and the version on that DLL is 1.0.0.261. The version of the same DLL in Vegas 6 is 1.0.0.2966.
Thus, I am 99% certain that the problem is entirely with the older WMV encoder included with that version of Vegas.
==========
Actually I was never able to encode to WMV at all uintil this week. I tried every workaround in the forum archives. Despite the fact that Media Player 7.1 with WMP 9 codecs plays all WMP files Vegas would not let me encode to either WM8 or WM9 until I downloaded and installed Media Player 9. Then it worked.

I plan to buy Vegas 7 when it is released mostly because I am tired of DVDA 1. They wouldn't sell me DVDA 2 as a stand alone when it was released.

I also plan to install Windows XP Pro. I have had an unopened retail version for three years sitting in the box.

Thanks for the compliment on my video clip content. It was actually just a clip. I love the stage. All forms of it.

John
johnmeyer wrote on 4/26/2006, 6:03 PM
I plan to buy Vegas 7 when it is released mostly because I am tired of DVDA 1.

DVDA 1.0 ... brrrrr ....
craftech wrote on 4/26/2006, 7:42 PM
Music Video

This was encoded at 400 x 232 (because the source was broadcast 4:3, but letterboxed). I used Bit Rate VBR (Peak) with an Average bitrate of 500K and a Peak bitrate of 1.95M, and a peak buffer size of 20. I set the Video Rendering Quality to "Best," although I don't think this was necessary and probably didn't make any difference.
===========
OK,

I tried John's settings above for the low-rez clip that was "Herky-Jerky".
It increased the file size to 8.8 MB, but it does look much better. I named the Windows Media 9 template the John Meyer Template and saved it.

I uploaded it to Putfile which plays videos in their own Windows Media window. You cannot link directly to the video as with Vimeo, but I have reached my weekly limit upload of 30MB until Sunday. Thus "Putfile"

Click on View Size and change it to "Original" and please let me know if this is an acceptable compromise in terms of video quality vs file size.
kentwolf wrote on 4/26/2006, 8:39 PM
>>Please help with suggestions for (clip)

Just out of curiousity, what camera are you using?
johnmeyer wrote on 4/26/2006, 9:07 PM
When you say you used my settings, I assume you kept the 320x240 settings. Don't mess with the aspect ratio for your clips (i.e., don't use my weird 400 x 232 settings).

Also, if file size is too big, just decrease the average bitrate (but I'm sure you already knew that). For some reason, when you change to peak, the file sizes are never the same even though the average bitrate is supposed to be identical.
craftech wrote on 4/27/2006, 3:53 AM
>>Please help with suggestions for (clip)

Just out of curiousity, what camera are you using?
===========
Sony VX2000

John
craftech wrote on 4/27/2006, 3:56 AM
When you say you used my settings, I assume you kept the 320x240 settings. Don't mess with the aspect ratio for your clips (i.e., don't use my weird 400 x 232 settings).

Also, if file size is too big, just decrease the average bitrate (but I'm sure you already knew that). For some reason, when you change to peak, the file sizes are never the same even though the average bitrate is supposed to be identical.
============
I kept the 320x240. "Putfile" enlarges the video for some reason, but when you drop down the menu under "View Size" you can change it to Original.

So how does it look with the John Meyer Template?

Click here and change to "Original" size:

Same Clip With John Meyer Template

Thanks,

John