100mb per minute

Would that be 100 Megabits (1.7 Mbps) or Megabytes (13.4 Mbps) ?

Bitrate is normally displayed as Megabits per second (Mbps).

There are 8 Megabits in each Megabytes (MB). So,

File Size (MB) = Time (Sec) x Bitrate (Mbps) x .125

You can solve just as easy for Bitrate or Time.

HTHAL

I'm talking usual media size, just like a cd is arround 700mb or a dvd is arround 4.7gb,

I'm talking usual media size,

That doesn't exist.

A DVD will hold exactly 4.35 GB ofprogram material, including audio and menus if applicable. Do the math, using your newfound skills, and report back.

There are Bitrate calculators on the internet that should alleviate your uncertainty; hower, I won't do the math for you.

I don't care about the bitrate, I care about filesize. Let's say your 4.35Gb dvd would have to contain 43 and a half minutes of my files.

I determined it was the good compromise for me. If it was more compressed than that, then my cpu (and me) would have a hard time. I fit was less compressed, then the files would be too big.

As for the video quality itseft, I'll get what I can get, as long as it's fine to watch.

Did you try to use x264vfw?

judelaw wrote on 10/5/2018, 6:19 PM

I don't care about the bitrate, I care about filesize. Let's say your 4.35Gb dvd would have to contain 43 and a half minutes of my files.

The you care about Bitrate. if you really want to be given the answer, I'm outta here.

FILE SIZE = BITRATE X TIME

Like Musicvid has explained. FILE SIZE is determined by two things. BITRATE and LENGTH. If you are wanting a specific bitrate, then you will have a specific file size with specific length programs. The only way to change a file size is to change the bitrate or the length. Media doesn't matter, quality doesn't matter, resolution doesn't matter, only bitrate and length.

I'm getting the feeling that learning anything isn't on the agenda tonight, David. Rest well.

I'm getting the feeling that learning anything isn't on the agenda tonight, David. Rest well.

 

I guess you're not, I'm the one trying to :)

Marco. wrote on 10/6/2018, 3:21 AM : "Did you try to use x264vfw?"

yes, I just did, but it gives only a 97mb file for à lenght of 3mn and a half (27mb/minute filesize).

https://nsa39.casimages.com/img/2018/10/06/181006055431198786.jpg

I've already put the template in my favorite just for the sake of it, but It's too compressed. AT least three times too compressed, I might need something better for my CPU, something less compressed.

You're wishing for a lot of things: Low compression, uncompressed audio, limited file size, high quality, CPU-friendliness. Something's probably going to have to give.

What's the purpose for your rendered file? Why do you need PCM audio? If you accept AAC audio, with a high bitrate if necessary, it opens up more possibilities.

If you are hell-bent on PCM, you could probably mux PCM with AVC or HEVC video in an MP4 wrapper using FFmpeg or some other method. It's non-standard but my Panasonic GH4 shoots AVC+PCM so it's not that weird.

"You're wishing for a lot of things"
I give you that :) I'm hell-bent on PCM because It's my music production.

Well if it's not standard there might be some issues later reading it modifying it or whatever.

@ Marco : Sorry I forgot the part about ABR I just tried with ABR at 13000 kbits/s and got the filesize I needed. But the resulting video has a huge discrepancy between sound and video. I don't know why...

The goal, as xvid and divx and x264vfw were all created for, was unlicensed copying of interlaced DVD, such that it would fit on a standard CD. Why? Well, they take up less bandwith for download pirates, and CDs "were" cheaper than burnable DVDs then. Of course most of tha has changed.

The author of this thread has taken this to a new level, as Nick points out, because like many of us, he prefers better audio. PCM is again, ridiculously large.

If one actually does the math, the Bitrate comes out ridiculously low, even with compressed audio. The 700 MB target is long gone because DVD blanks are pennies apiece.

Size, Quality, Speed. Pick two.

Downloads in this decade are 1-2 MB, and discs are well, 4.35 GB of usable space. Most of this is done with x264 (vfw file sizes are bigger because the Avi wrapper supports not a single b-,frame.

If the author is clinging to nostalgia for nostalgia's sake, I've got a whole bunch of classic cassette tapes I'd like to give to someone who appreciates the warmth...

Maybe there is a misunderstanding here, I mentioned cd's and dvd's in order to solve the confusion between Megabits/Megabytes etc... I don't plan on putting my video on cds or dvds. Size file is important for me because of SSD space and transfer rate from the ssd to the cpu, that's the only reason.

I guess there is a misunderstanding. Transfer rates from SSD are in the range of 6 gigabits per second. That is a thousand times faster than you need.

The drive itself should never be a bottleneck unless the connection or internal drive temperature is causing it to be throttled somehow.

Your hardware where your solution is, if there is indeed a transfer problem. That goes double if you are streaming. Your answer is not compressing your files so they can fit through a mousehole. You could drive a Mack truck through my bandwidth tunnel, which uses conventional drives.

Might be better to start a new thread, provide the necessary file and system information and steps to reproduce, and not limit our powers of observation without your own conclusions as to causes or mediation. Just need to start with a fresh plate, that's all.

https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum/important-information-required-to-help-you--110457/

If you are really interested in creating legal downloads at reduced size, hop on over to the Handbrake forums. It replaced divx for your still-unclear goals some time back. Except i think im catching on. Best.

I guess you're right. I know my ssd should read at around 250MB/s ( because of my crappy sata 2 limitation) but a yuv template I've just used and seems to be working fine gave me a 3GB/minute file. So that's 50MB/s. Unless I'm mixing five of those at ounce on my timeline, It should be fine, right ? Thought I suspect Vegas of reading the tracks even when they are not on top or muted. The point is I deal with many source videos, about 15 tracks with a different video on each.

Anyway ... Then I convert all the source files I might use to my YUV template. Once it's done I set my project video to match the template of those huge numerous YUV files of mine. That way I get a smooth preview while working spitting, making transitions, adding effects etc... And then I render with a more compressed codec.

Or am I missing something ?

"still-unclear goals" I 'm just doing video clips for my songs. The music itself is the real creation. As for the video I just pick extracts from youtube videos to illustrate my songs. That's it.

I don't care about the bitrate, I care about filesize. Let's say your 4.35Gb dvd would have to contain 43 and a half minutes of my files.

Bitrate is directly tied to file size, if you know your bitrate, you know your file size. By doing the math MusicVid pointed out, you can determine that in order to get the file size you are looking for, you need to go with a bitrate of 13mbps. They do not go by "size per minute/hour" like you are trying to do, only number of megabits per second (sometimes they go by kilobits per second as well).

For your uses, I'd go with pairing an AVC or x264 file with PCM audio. You can render Magix AVC and then use another app like mp4boxGUI to remux the audio with a PCM stream. That should do what you are trying to do. The reason AVC is the preferred codec is, it decodes easy by the CPU, file size is small, and almost any device is going to be able to play it. If you're not worried about device compatibility, then a codec like Magic YUV, ProRes, etc. might better suit you, but for both easy decompression and compatibility, AVC is king.

A quick export gives me approx 11mb for 1 min of uncompressed PCM audio. So if the aim is 100mb per minute that leaves 89mb per minute for the video which should be adequate for good quality. Using Musicvid's formula it gives a bitrate of 11.87Mbps.

So much for a teachable moment.

Honestly, I don't do this for my own amusement nor to provoke (much). At 69, everything I ever learned suddenly became rehab.

700Mbps video "might" be tolerable for a still talking head against a static backdrop at ≤SD resolution using x264 compression (not vfw, which tests 5-15% larger).

http://www.jazzythedog.com/testing/dnxhd/Hd-guide.aspx#LBR

[Edit] I will see if Jerry can link these as something other than flash[/Edit]

The obvious suggestion is to abandon PCM audio and take the road well traveled (Jerry ran thise tests years back).

-- An idle mind is the devil's playground

(with apologies to Chaucer)

"700Mbps video "might" be tolerable for a still talking head against a static backdrop at ≤SD resolution using x264 compression (not vfw, which tests 5-15% larger)."

Consider whether you let the slide rule slip a couple orders of magnitude since your screenshot showed 711Kbps.