WMV vs MPEG-4

Movick wrote on 7/31/2006, 11:05 AM
Hello All,

I've been putting together 30 second spots for a digital signage location I'm developing. I have been rendering .wmv files at 3 Mbps, at the highest quality setting, and quite frankly I'm not completely pleased with the rendered file. The text I've created using Wild Form FX seems a tad soft, as does the rest of the video - simply not all that crisp. Would a rendered MPEG-4 give me sharper results? I am still working in VV5. Is there a optimal setting in wmv that will yield better results?
Also, it was suggested that I deinterlace all videos for optimal playback on these screens. I do not see a way to render a progressive scan in WMV. Is there a way to do this using this codec?

Comments

Yoyodyne wrote on 7/31/2006, 12:17 PM
I'm not at Vegas at the moment but you should be able to hit the custom button and tweak away. I would try to up the bit rate to 7 or 8 mbps. Also if this is playing on a HD monitor from a computer I would try one of the HD templates.
Movick wrote on 7/31/2006, 2:50 PM
This isn't from a HD source though. I still don't see any deinterlace option for .wmv.
Also, for my screens, a perfect 4x3 video will suit the layout - will a 800x600 compromise quality verses 640x480?

Thanx,

Mov
johnmeyer wrote on 7/31/2006, 6:36 PM
I have not used WMV for high-quality rendering (although I did try to render HDV to WMV, without much success). However, with low bitrate encoding, I found I got much better quality when I used the VBR settings in the Vegas encoder. Try a test encode of 15-25 seconds and see if it looks better with VBR.
Movick wrote on 7/31/2006, 7:15 PM
I'm not all too thrilled with the .wmv encodes. I assume that an MPEG-4 will render out discernably better? Is there an optimal codec suggestion for the cleanest and sharpest renderings?

I guess I'll need to download a good compatible MPEG-4 codec for my media player - anyone know of a good clean one which I may install on the remote media player for optimal playback?

Thanks!

Mov
fldave wrote on 7/31/2006, 8:08 PM
.wmv is more universal, more players will play it. I've seen some (relatively) gorgeous wmv videos.

For MPEG4, "the" new standard is H.264. Sony/MainConcept solutions in Vegas are mp4, and are called "AVC/AAC" in the Save As Type in the render dialog box. AVC/H.264 is one of the new Blue-Ray/HD-DVD formats, in their proper size.

Nero Showtime is supposed to play H.264 video, as is Windows Media Player, with the proper codec.

I think any of these with the proper settings will do a great job. I mostly depends on the video size and bitrate you pick.

Edited: Sorry, see you are in VV5. I think the AVC codecs are in V6. You should still get a nice video in wmv with experimentation.
NickHope wrote on 7/31/2006, 8:58 PM
If you choose a size other than the original interlaced footage, WMV de-interlaces by itself doesn't it?

At high bitrates I've had results with XVID that look very much like the original footage. I encode with it as a plug-in to VirtualDub.
Movick wrote on 8/1/2006, 10:09 AM
In VV5 it seems I have very limited options with .wmv. The templates offer up to 3mbps. I tried the bitrate VBR setting, entered 8M for the average bitrate, and the video still is not as crisp as I'd like it. The problem here is that my screens will be segmented into 3 areas: a news/weather ticker on the bottom, a "sidebar" panel on the left which displays static .jpeg images which look pretty crisp. When the video plays next to the ubiquitous .jpeg sidebar, the text and images look fuzzy by comparison.
I'm hoping that I don't have a video card issue or something? I tried a high quality mpeg-2 and it didn't look too swell either. Any assistance with rendering a clean clear video would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks

Mov
Movick wrote on 8/2/2006, 8:27 AM
Anyone?
JohnnyRed wrote on 8/2/2006, 8:55 AM
In the last few weeks I have been rendering 1024x768 wmv files at 10 mbps bitrate in Vegas 4.0e, and I think they look terrific. They certainly look much better than mpeg-2 files for DVD use. Most of these projects are photo slideshows and I am starting out with high resolution photos. I have rendered a few video projects to wmv files, just to watch on my pc, and I notice much less compression artifacts compared to mpeg-2.

The file sizes for a 1024x768 wmv file at 10 mbps is a little bigger than a 720x480 mpeg 2 files at 8 mbps.
kkolbo wrote on 8/2/2006, 12:18 PM
I have been doing something similar. I found my best results were when I set the project setting at the resolution of the screen it was going to be played back at. In my case 800x600, square pixels. I set the de-interlace to interpolate. Then, when I am ready to render I use the WMV9 CODEC with the default template. That is a quality based VBR with the setting at 90%. It uses whatever the project resolution is for the project.

BTW, WMV is a progressive CODEC by defaut. You do not have to set it. Interlaced source footage will look softer after rendered to progressive. The interpolate setting with help some. Setting it for progressive and the correct resolution in the project properties has made a difference for me.
KK