Discussion {{'2007-08-22T08:41:07-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}

How to encode video for Internet Use

I need some advice, I use a 4 year old Sony HI8 camera to video tape high school football games. My camera hooks usb to my computer and last year I used windows movie maker to encode the video for publishing to the internet.My problem is I want clean crisp Internet video when I encode it into wmv file, It looks go......

Please log on to comment on this discussion.

11 Comments
Sort by:
Written on {{'2017-10-14T04:46:19-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Selected Answer
To convert mxf to wmv or any other video formats mxf convereter for mac is your best chioce.   download  and have a try best mxf editor
Written on {{'2017-09-25T20:25:29-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Selected Answer
got any other suggestions on how to encode the videos?
Written on {{'2017-09-15T01:33:52-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Selected Answer

Sorry to bother you mates but this really seems to be the only thread i can find about video encoder conversion? I also have a problem of FBR ( by BB Flashback) to MP4 encoder and format conversion. I downloaded this video conversion program to convert fbr to mp4 (http://www.videoconverterfactory.com/tips/convert-fbr-to-mp4.html) as you can see. The article claims that i can directly convert a video to any formats, but after I added my FBR file to the interface of it, it requested me to choose an encoder. There were 2 kinds of encoders , H264 and MPEG4, i do not know which encoder i should select. I also find another type of video file named MJPEG on the internet and I do not know what are the relations between them. As for H264, i know that it is a compressed encoder, so i am worrying that there could be some sort of quality or content  loss in the course of conversion, is that true? The video output resolution and frame rate is 720p- 60fps and i do not literally like to decrease the file size by losing video output quality and decreasing it to 30fps or even aounrd 24 fps that is less smooth. So, anyone has any ideas how i can safely choose a proper codec? H264 or MPEG4?

Written on {{'2007-09-17T14:55:18-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Selected Answer

h.264 (mp4) compression will do the trick without sacrificing quality.  Unfortunately, all windows offering aren't free.  MacOSX Quicktime comes with encoder built right in and you can do it in one shot to convert a format to mp4.  Linux has all the utils needed to make one, but needs a little more than just mouse clicks for your part -- it's a three step process and not GUI...hey, it's free!

Click here for the linux link.

Written on {{'2007-09-17T10:20:22-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Selected Answer

If you figure out a way to make it look nice w/ a small file size...do tell.

I have been trying through windows media encoder 9 (converting a full size .avi file to a smaller "internet streaming wmp format") with high bit-rate and the video still appears grainy. I go from .avi (source file from digital camera)->.avi (premiere export file)->wmp (attempted streaming file)

As a note, I use Premiere (version 7) for my video editing but i will be getting CS3 sometime soon... 

Written on {{'2007-08-23T12:05:55-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Selected Answer
[quote user="rhamilton"]

What type of editing software do you use?

[/quote] I have a very old version of Adobe Premiere (6.0) and for a long time I was using Cinelerra on Linux..  Premiere was expensive when I bought it 7 years ago and is even more expensive today..  Cinelerra is great, but takes a lot of getting used to since the menus and graphical user interface on it doesn't really match any typical application on Windows or on Linux.. So Cinelerra has a sharp learning curve but is very powerful..  Adobve Premiere 6.0 runs really fast though, and that's one of the reasons why I like it.. Even when you're chucking around massive sized video files, having a video editing program that doesn't use up much RAM by itself (before loading videos) is really nice..

Cinelerra is free and open source which is VERY very nice..

 

Written on {{'2007-08-23T11:58:39-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Selected Answer

Thanks again for your help,

 I'll give it another shot tonight, or this weekend. I have used Movie Maker in the past and last night and I know it has it's problems and limitations but it's what I know right now. I'm trying to use other software. I have Pinnacle Studio 11 but you can't save to divx unless you want to pay extra which I haven't looked into yet but I might.

I do want my video to look great, I take pride in my work and hate the second rate quality i've been getting. I'll keep working on it.

What type of editing software do you use?

Thanks

Written on {{'2007-08-23T10:52:07-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Selected Answer
[quote user="rhamilton"]

The problem is the file size is huge, I think I had it a 320x whatever but for a minute and 53 seconds of video the file size was like 168mb. That is just way to huge for others to download off the internet. Plus my videos will most likely be 5 to 6 minutes of video making the file size just way to big.

 Am I doing something wrong or any other suggestions? Thanks
 

[/quote] [:D] Go back and re-read what I wrote..   The only time you use HuffYUV or other lossless codecs is for importing into video editing software.. Where you make your edits, add effects, etc.. And THEN you render and encode into a lossy codec to whatever file size you feel is appropriate for an Internet release..  IF you're not using video editing software then don't use HuffYUV / uncompressed since there will be no point in it...

The whole point of using HuffYUV or dealing with uncompressed footage is that you avoid having to save twice in a lossy codec..  If you're saving in MPEG from the Camera and then editing it and saving in MPEG again, you're doing something I'd think is wrong if you want to keep the best quality..  If you're saving in XVID or DIVX (also Lossy) from the Camera and then editing it and saving in XVID/DIVX/MPEG (or any other lossy codec) then you're doing something wrong also if you want to preserve the most quality..

If you're taking footage straight from the camera without editing it to publish on the Internet, then it doesn't matter what you save it in, as long as you only compress it once..

The reason why lossless codecs create such large filesizes is because NO quality was lost in the compression..  And that's a very handy thing because you don't want to lose quality before you even get it into the video editor. Once you lose video quality, you can never get it back without recording the video again or going back to the original video file...   Again, most people just don't give a darn and compress into lossy and then throw it into a video editor along with the compression artifacts generated by the lossy codec and then render and compress again into another lossy codec.. The result is garbage quality output because you had garbage (lossy compressed) input into the video editor to begin with..

It's pretty advanced stuff, but if you really want to get the best quality, it's definitely something to consider..  I made a few videos with double lossy compression and then jumped right into video editing files that were either uncompressed or compressed with a lossless codec (no data  lost in the compression, think of HuffYUV as a .zip file for video).

When you encode to a lossy codec, you can encode at ANY filesize you want..  If you choose a low bitrate you will get a very tiny file with terrible artifacts and very poor quality..  If you choose a higher bit rate you will get better quality but larger file size.. That is how lossy codecs work.. A 2-pass lossy codec such as Xvid and DivX can build your output file to whatever size you want it to be. 1 Megabyte or 500 Megabytes, whatever you want..  However, lossy codecs add compression artifacts and distortions (which you described in your original post)..  Which is why you do lossy compression as the absolute last step and then publish it... And also give the lossy codec more bitrate so it can save a higher quality video file (and having a larger filesize).

 

Even though all of the above applies to 2) I think your real problem is probably 1).. You're just trying to compress the file into a size that's too small for the quality that you're demanding.. You need to loosen up the compression a bit and give the codec some more bitrate to work with.. It can be very annoying working with Windows Movie Maker because they automatically try to do everything for you.. And that's probably what your problem is..   Try saving to a lossy codec such as XVid or DivX instead of WMV if you're not being presented with the options to set your filerate and/or target filesize..

 

 

Written on {{'2007-08-23T08:45:24-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Selected Answer

Sidicas if your still around I have another question for you. I tried what you said last night, I used a lossless codec the Huffyuv and the video does appear to be much better quality when capturing it.

The problem is the file size is huge, I think I had it a 320x whatever but for a minute and 53 seconds of video the file size was like 168mb. That is just way to huge for others to download off the internet. Plus my videos will most likely be 5 to 6 minutes of video making the file size just way to big.

 Am I doing something wrong or any other suggestions? Thanks
 

Written on {{'2007-08-22T10:06:33-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Selected Answer

Thanks for the Reply Sidicas,

That sure does sound like my problem, I'll give that a try.

 Thank You and God Bless

 


 

From Topics:
Archive

Post Stats

  • 0 Followers
  • 663 Views
  • 11 Comments
  • Last Edited on {{'2017-10-14T04:46:19-07:00' | moment:'fromNow'}}
Feedback
LOADING...