Absolutely. People don't understand that compression is as much of an
art as filming or editing. They also don't understand that sometimes
you have to shoot with your final output format in mind, which means
tighter shots, better light and less movement if you're compresing to
iPod size for
I have an HV20, and it's pretty much overkill for internet
productions. The good thing about it is that recording in 1080/60i,
it's easy to green/bluescreen and do smooth slow motion effects.
Another good (GREAT) thing about shooting in HD is that you get a crispness
of picture that you can't
I don't think file *size* is as important as data rate.
Like Verdi's saying, you want people to be able to view your videos
without them constantly stopping to buffer. The better quality you
can get at lower data rates, the more likely you are for people to
watch your show and not get frustrated
that is the trick though, finding the right data rate, now for Macs
there are all kinds of good advice on that but for PC'sit's hard
to findit's something I am playing with a lot right now, trying
to find a good data rate and size for PC's.
I have for a while been exporting as an avi
Well the data rate settings should be the same on Windows as on OS X. The
problem is if
your video editing package doesnt have the right encoder built in, and you have
to go to
an intermediate format that is then loaded into an encoder. Ther are potential
problems
where either quality is
] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
I have been inspired by this video:
HYPERLINK
http://www.flashvideofactory.com/test/DEMO720_Heima_H264_500K.htmlhttp
://www.flashvid-eofactory.-com/test/-DEMO720_Heima_-H264_500K.-html
So that video is 1280x720 25fps but the bitrate
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins
Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2008 10:44 AM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter
anymore?
I have been inspired by this video:
HYPERLINK
http://www.flashvideofactory.com/test
AM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter
anymore?
I have been inspired by this video:
HYPERLINK
http://www.flashvideofactory.com/test/DEMO720_Heima_H264_500K.html;
http
://www.flashvid-eofactory.-com/test
I still keep my video at 320x240. Unless there is a really good reason, I'm
doing some real
high art lets say (which I'm not), there is no reason to waste that much
bandwidth. The
bandwidth is not free and it is not limitless. Someone somewhere has to pay for
it, and I dont
see the point of
Wow - 320x240. I haven't produced video that small in over a year. I think
that 512x288 is the minimum I'd do, and most of the stuff we shoot is
640x360. We recently produced the video for the Santa Barbara International
Film Festival and we did Flash, iPod 640x360 and HD 960x540. We interviewed
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, influxxmedia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I still keep my video at 320x240. Unless there is a really good
reason, I'm doing some real
high art lets say (which I'm not), there is no reason to waste that
much bandwidth. The
bandwidth is not free and it is not
Rural areas are a concern, I would agree, but again, you can only
compress so much and sometimes you are fighting goverment regulation
as in the case of china, so I am not sure what can be done about
situations like that.
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
[EMAIL
I completly agree on having choices, that's part of why I offer a
windows file as well as a flash, the issue I am having at the moment,
is that in Vegas you can now export to Ipod right out of vegas,
saving me time as I now longer have to create an avi then use
quicktime pro. But in vegas you
Matter in what sense? Largest possible audience? Probably, but I've
been doing HUGE files since 05 and havn't had any problems growing an
audience.
As a general rule my shows are a hour and a half long (movie and host
segments). Now I have spent a long time trying to perfect my
compression, but
On Feb 4, 2008 5:14 PM, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But this does lead to another question, how many people are watching
the videos on site and how many download and watch on their
portable? Anybody know of any studies on that?
Good question. I think the vast majority of people are
I have been inspired by this video:
http://www.flashvideofactory.com/test/DEMO720_Heima_H264_500K.html
So that video is 1280x720 25fps but the bitrate is only 500K :)
So that video which is naerly 4 minutes long, is only 15.5MB in size, but 720p
resolution :)
In not sure which encoder
://rambos-locker.blogspot.com
-Original Message-
From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins
Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2008 10:44 AM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
I have been
17 matches
Mail list logo
