wm9 render size

genie wrote on 8/27/2005, 4:34 AM

Hi,
I have rendered a one minute section of my video into various formats ready for upload to web. It is PAL format 720x576

WM v9 default = 5.3 mb
Real video = 2.51mb
Quicktime 6 = 2.33mb.

If I reduce the wmv9 to only half size and 512kb per sec then it is still 3.41 mb and looks terrible!

I want to use wmv9 so I can use DRM protection. Any ideas why the file size in windows is still so large.
Also anybody know the best way to encode for DRM and how to set up the license system.

with thanks,

Genie

Comments

B_JM wrote on 8/27/2005, 8:27 AM

http://wmlicense.smdisp.net/licenserequest/default.asp

follow the directions above -- it will take awhile to get your lic ..

dont ever use the default wmv settings .. use vbr or 2 pass cbr , lenthen the keyframes to 5 , use 484 (about low as you can go as wmv is really not that good) as the bitrate , set smoothness to about 85 .. also you are using square pixels for output so that is not the correct size .. reduce it to 640 x 480 1:1 PAR .. if you need to still increase the quality - you will have to reduce the FPS

btw -- DRM on wmv has been completly cracked -- so it is sort of a pointless thing to do ... plus if you offer it in QT or RM kinda defeats the purpose ..

genie wrote on 8/27/2005, 5:12 PM

Thanks B_JM for your response. Yes I was only using the quick time and real player versions as a guide to file size. Interesting to hear that DRM has been cracked. I'll play with the settings you suggest but microsoft are certainly making hard work out of it!

p@mast3rs wrote on 8/27/2005, 6:28 PM

A bit off topic in this thread, but seriously reconsider using DRM. Its pointless and it hurts the people that pay your bills, your customers. I can understand wanting to protect your revenue and product but learn from Hollywood's mistakes. Keep the cost low for the consumer and dont limit legitimate paying customers the choice of where/when to watch a product that they paid for.

If you are looking for awesome quality, H.264 AVC is definitely one of the ways to go.

genie wrote on 8/27/2005, 11:11 PM

Thanks guys, you're awesome. Yes totally rethinking DRM as a path to go down and thanks for the tip on the H.264 AVC, looks totally intriguing. I managed to output my video in Windows v9 at about 3.3mb per min - two pass cbr, 640x480, half pal, video smoothness 85, bit rate 484.
If I use a low output res of 368kb/sec which still seems to look fine then 2.82mb per min. I noticed this was the resolution output on some video files that I had paid to download from a site.

The only question I had left was the comment from B_Jim about the square pixels not being the right size - but I thought computers worked with square pixels and they seem to be the only option to work with in Vegas 6 apart from a HD sizing which wouldn't apply?

thanks,
genie

B_JM wrote on 8/28/2005, 5:39 AM

what i (badly stated) meant is that your source DV file is not square pixel , but your output is .. in your first render that did not look good , you used the same resolution, but your aspect ratio would have then changed .. this also causes some effects and text to look more smeared ..

genie wrote on 8/28/2005, 4:53 PM

Thanks B_JM.

Okay got it - changed the source video to square pixels as well.

Genie