#26 March 12th, 2004 05:20 AM

thylacine
Member

Re: Videos?

Head wrote:

The reason we chose MPEG1 was that everybody can play it.  I would be interested to see a comparison if you'd email me a sample, something of similar pixel size, similar Kbytes/minute, in MPEG1 format.  We tried various compressions to get something we thought was a reasonable compromise between size and quality, but we'll consider changing if we can improve the quality without drowning in "your videos won't play" emails.

A sample MPEG 1 video has been sent to you.

I should have said nearly unwatchable rather than unplayable. There were no problems in getting the Missy Trash video to work, only in its picture quality.

Offline

#27 March 14th, 2004 02:01 PM

thylacine
Member

Re: Videos?

Head wrote:

OK well thanks for all the opinions on video formats. We've decided, initially anyway, to go with MPG here at ISM. As the video side of things develops and the videos get longer (i.e. as we get better at editing) we might add one of the more esoteric but efficient formats as well. Our main aim though will be to always have a universal format.

As for Beautiful Agony, I believe the *ahem* clever people over there will soon be switching also.

You might like to tell the not so clever people at Beautiful Agony that whilst they may have changed the file format the previews still cannot be downloaded by anyone not using a Windows box!

Offline

#28 March 14th, 2004 05:31 PM

Head
Administrator

Re: Videos?

thylacine wrote:

You might like to tell the not so clever people at Beautiful Agony that whilst they may have changed the file format the previews still cannot be downloaded by anyone not using a Windows box!

Not so, there are plenty of Mac customers who can use it just fine.

Offline

#29 March 15th, 2004 12:46 AM

thylacine
Member

Re: Videos?

Head wrote:

Not so, there are plenty of Mac customers who can use it just fine.

I don't currently have Mac OS X installed so I can't comment on how well that works. But the previews most definitely don't work with the Classic Mac OS (which is still used by more than half of all Mac users) whatever I do. All that happens is a window with a red line across it pops up, plus a message telling me I don't have the right codec installed and an invitation to install it. When that is clicked on it simply leads to the MS Windows Media Player download page. Which is already installed on this machine.

Can I suggest you buy or borrow a Mac that boots up in both Mac OS X and the Classic Mac OS and check that things will actually work on that platform!

Offline

#30 March 17th, 2004 12:00 PM

thylacine
Member

Re: Videos?

Congratulations, Hazel's video was much better than your first effort! Though there's still a problem with the picture breaking up for a second or so after every edit point. The same problem happens to a lesser extent when there is movement in the video.

Offline

#31 March 17th, 2004 11:33 PM

_matt_
Member

Re: Videos?

thylacine wrote:

Congratulations, Hazel's video was much better than your first effort! Though there's still a problem with the picture breaking up for a second or so after every edit point. The same problem happens to a lesser extent when there is movement in the video.

This is due to the codec being used to compress the video & the number of keyframes, etc.

Head, if you are not already, I would recommend using the Sorenson 3 codec. It is ideal for video featuring the human figure & skin tones.

I personally would also compress the videos a little less. I think a file size of 10-15 MB for the final video would be more appropriate, given the length of the pieces.

Offline

#32 March 18th, 2004 05:51 PM

Head
Administrator

Re: Videos?

_matt_ wrote:

This is due to the codec being used to compress the video & the number of keyframes, etc.

Head, if you are not already, I would recommend using the Sorenson 3 codec. It is ideal for video featuring the human figure & skin tones.

I personally would also compress the videos a little less. I think a file size of 10-15 MB for the final video would be more appropriate, given the length of the pieces.

OK I think you might be right, maybe we underestimated the patience of our members.  We'll be looking into various codecs and soon-ish we'll be offering 3 formats to choose from, but we're still working through the new site bugs at the moment.  Thanks for your feedback all.

Offline

#33 March 18th, 2004 10:01 PM

thylacine
Member

Re: Videos?

Head wrote:

OK I think you might be right, maybe we underestimated the patience of our members.  We'll be looking into various codecs and soon-ish we'll be offering 3 formats to choose from, but we're still working through the new site bugs at the moment.  Thanks for your feedback all.

Speaking as someone still struggling along on a dial-up connection I wouldn't have a problem with a file size of 10-15MB that Matt suggested, if it resulted in a better quality video. On average I can manage to download about 10-12MB of data per hour. But please don't go over 20MB, unless you have resumable video downloads. I don't know what it's like in Oz, but here in the UK ISPs automatically cut off a connection at two hours or less.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB