Putting video on the web

clive

clive

Hi Guys

I've been phoned up by a friend who is putting video on his website. He's used QT, but his web designer wants him to use something that is more friendly to PC users. Any ideas about what he should use?

I suggested cinepak as a codec, but as I've never had to do this myself I'm not completely sure.

He's tried Mpeg4 but the file sizes are too big. He thought Mpeg2 but he can't find a coverter to change his QT files to Mpeg2.

Any suggestions? I guess he's looking for something that will allow the most web users to view the footage.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Yea the Cinepak CODEC comes with Windows so that's always a great place to start.

.WMV format is widely readable from Windows PCs. The filesize is pretty good too as well as quality.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks guys. I've passed the information on.

Has anyone here used flash vector video for the web? I did some research earlier this year, but haven't seen an indie film maker who sucessfully used it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
whatever format he uses, please at least have hi or someone he knows test it with a macintosh...I hate spending a half an hour downloading a WMV file that won't play cause some checkbox is toggled making it unplayable on my macintosh. (I'm not actually sure what causes it to not play, but some do and some don't...same with AVIs)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
MPEG 1 might be a good choice. Although that filesize would be bigger than MPEG4. MPEG2 might actually be much bigger depending on the bitrate they choose. MPEG4 is the best choice in my opinion. Windows media on a mac is not and was never a good idea. . . heh. IMO, windows media is good if you don't want a clear image. . . or a good sound. . . If you want the best possible compression: MPEG4 looks good and sounds very clear.

Pick a more Windows friendly format? Yikes! I'm a bit of a mac loyalist, so I feel I should say "Why stoop for windows users?" But that may not be politically correct. . . Never sacrifice quality! Never! ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm a mac user myself and so is my friend, but the web designer is a PC user and can't get his head round QT. He's also not video literate, so my freind is having an up hill struggle.

I'm still interested in flash vector as a possible solution as it's java based and crosses the mac/pc divide.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Your friend can get the free Windows Media Encoder here.

PremPro has Adobe Media Encoder built in, with dozens of presets for Media Player & QuickTime. (Though the QT ones suck)

Sun's Java no longer comes included with Windows. (Though parts of it may still be built into Internet Explorer... or maybe even that's just javascript now). Full java functionality requires manually downloading it from Sun's website here.

Flash requires anyone wanting to view it on a PC to have a download from Macromedia, as well. The Flash Player.

Cross-platform is a hassle :cool:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Here I would recommend QuickTime, in particular with the following two codecs:
Sorenson Video Pro (not basic) for video, and QDesign Music 2 Pro for audio (or mp3 but bigger size for same quiality).

That would give you the best image/audio with the smalest file size for progressive download video files (files that you do not stream, but that you view as they download bit by bit).

QuickTime is cross platform.

Cinepak is an old codec that would require 7 times the data rate to achieve an image close to that of SV Pro. It is indeed cross platform. Windows Media is horrible for Mac, where as QuickTime is pretty much the same for Windows and Mac.

The WINDOW MEDIA VIDEO (.WMV) is the most downloaded video type from my site
Click to expand...
95% of computer users use Windows, which explains that.

I have encoded videos to Flash video format, but I prefer QuickTime. Windows is better for streaming video.

All videos on my site are encoded in the format mentioned. They are usually about half the size you would expect for that quality. Feel free to check it out > http://www.flaviuman.com/

The only downside to the Sorenson/mp3 solutions is it's cost, render time, and required knowledge of compression.

Hope that helps, if not I'll be glad to clarify anything.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Will Vincent said:
likely he will get the best quality/size results with mpeg4... it's all dependent on the settings.
Click to expand...

I've done lots of side by side comparisons between Sorenson Video (3 Pro) and mpeg4. Sometimes the differences were subtle. The footage that is being compressed plays a crucial role sometimes. Generally, in my opinion, given the same bitrate, SV3 Pro produces a sharper image (mpeg4 tends to be softer) that is richer in contrast and color. You also have to remember that mpeg4 was, after all, hacked and DIVX was developed. Apparently some thought it could be improved - and it was.

Will Vincent said:
video size and bitrate (and audio bitrate) are the most determining factors to overall size.
Click to expand...
Of course. However, this is exactly what sets the codecs apart - the quality they can achieve at the given bitrate. Some codecs require much more bandwith than others to achieve the same image/audio quality.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
i suggest sticking with Quicktime if you have the means to compress it properly. On windows, Discreet Cleaner 5 is what I used to use ages ago before I went mac.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top