Video Size >230Mo for 5 minutes in 720p HD !

Jderamaix wrote on 10/3/2013, 4:03 AM
Hi,
I just got a new HD cam and when i tried to make a movie with Vegas Studio, my video was like 230 Mo for a 5 minutes video.
I made the same with another software (camtasia) and i got a 30Mo video with same quality.
I tried different settings to have a HD 720p mp4, but I don't find any that works.

How can i have a 5 min 720p video with Vegas Movie Studio that does not have such a huge size ?

Tx in advance
Jerome

Comments

Steve Grisetti wrote on 10/3/2013, 7:15 AM
Actually, that's not terribly large for an editable file. I'm not quite sure what 230 Mo means, but most editable video files are about 200-300 megs per minute of video, or about 4 gigabytes for every 15 minutes or so).

Once you edit the video, you can output to a smaller size. And what you output as depends on how you're going to use it (ie, put it on YouTube, burn it to a DVD or BluRay, use it in another video project).

But it's best that your editable source video files have as little compression as possible -- so they're large by nature. That's why a large hard drive is essential to any video editor.
Chienworks wrote on 10/3/2013, 7:28 AM
I've seen a few other European posters use "Mo" and it appears to be the same thing as MB. If that's the case here then 230 Mo really isn't quite so huge.

As often happens, Jerome is missing the importance of bitrate. The output file size is determined by two things, and two things only: duration and bitrate. Assuming that the video is going to be 5 minutes long and no further editing is desired, the only way to get a smaller file is to use a lower bitrate. It doesn't matter what format, codec, or "quality" settings are used, only the bitrate.

Most of the render templates have a 'custom' button which lets you pick the bitrate desired.
Jderamaix wrote on 10/3/2013, 4:03 PM
Tx for your answers,

Well, 230 MB (that's it, a Mo is a MB) seems quite huge to me for a 5 minutes mp4 video in 720p, maybe i was wrong. But as another software produced a 30MB video with exactly the same sources.
That was not for the editable file, but for the mp4 final video.

I looked for bitrate settings, which i haven't fin yet. Can you tell me where to look for it in vegas movie studio 11 ? If it's fps, i m already using the 23,946fps.

tx in advance
musicvid10 wrote on 10/3/2013, 8:39 PM
It's just math.
230 MB x 8 = 1840 Mb
5 Min x 60 = 300 Sec.
1840/300 = ~6 Mbps (that's your bitrate!)

A little fatter than you'll get from Vimeo, a little slim for my own personal use. Pretty unimpressive, really.
A usable bitrate for your own video will depend on a tremendous number of factors, from motion to detail to noise and grain. A slideshow without fades might be perfectly fine at 300 Kbps, a bicycle race might suffer at 10 Mbps.

Even if you encode in Vegas, I suggest you watch the tutorial to get some feel for the Big Three of video encoding -- compression, quality, and encoding time. If all you are interested in is small files, you can do that -- at a price. TANSTAAFL



Jderamaix wrote on 10/4/2013, 4:43 AM
Tx, i'll look at your video, but I still don't understand how a 5'30" 1080p video wich was only 18MB can be transformed in a 5' 720p video of 230 MB... and still be considered as "optimized" :)
musicvid10 wrote on 10/4/2013, 11:00 AM
The answer is your source was grossly suboptimal.
That's if those numbers are even correct, which is highly implausible.
446 Kbps 1080p source, as you suggest, would seem possible only with a still image (no motion) source.
Are you sure you didn't mean 18 Mb per second?

Here's what I suggest for you to start making some sense of what you are seeing:
1. Post the complete MediaInfo properties for both source and rendered video. Then we can start to sort out your numbers. MediaInfo is a free download from Sourceforge.
2. Start to discover the relationship between bitrate, size, and compression. I wrote a basic guide here.
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=12&MessageID=866336
3. Watch the video tutorial above to get a sense of how this works in real life.

One of the biggest pitfalls is not providing complete information and getting a confused picture. Let's start there and take it one question at a time. Your peers on the forums are always glad to help.
Ivan Lietaert wrote on 10/5/2013, 5:20 AM
"Tx, i'll look at your video, but I still don't understand how a 5'30" 1080p video wich was only 18MB can be transformed in a 5' 720p video of 230 MB... and still be considered as "optimized" :)"

You've got something terribly wrong; stop bashing Vegas until you get your information right. If a 5 min video at 1080p was only 18MB for real and great in quality, it would be on the frontpage of every international newspaper and the inventor of that compression method would be given the Nobel prize!
Also, Apple, Sony and all the major players on the field would be lining up to sign the company.
;-)
Chienworks wrote on 10/5/2013, 6:30 PM
"Tx, i'll look at your video, but I still don't understand how a 5'30" 1080p video wich was only 18MB can be transformed in a 5' 720p video of 230 MB... and still be considered as "optimized" :)"

You're assuming that the input and the output have something to do with each other. In fact, they don't. Vegas inflates the source video stream into an uncompressed version frame-by-frame, at which point the file size, compression, and bitrate used in the source files mean absolutely nothing anymore. *THEN*, Vegas compresses the rendered output using whatever rendering template, codec, and various parameters you have specified for compression and bitrate which then defines out output file size. So, 230MB *IS* optimized from the point of view of the stream of uncompressed frames that Vegas was dealing with during the render process.