Printable View
My boring task for next week is re-sizing all 120,000 photos from our members areas. I've just been told my task for the week after is re-compressing all the videos.
We currently have .mov files that play in quicktime, but apparently that's not very popular.
What options do you guys offer on your sites, and what do you like best when you're surfing?
What file size should I am for (per minute of footage)?
Thanks in advance!!
quicktime is my favorite. my new site will offer both quicktime and wmv.
do you have to use only one size of video? earlier this year, about 20% of our members were watching the dialup size videos, so it may be worth offering more than one size.
popular wise id say windows media. quality wise id say real media the codec for real player 10 is great the quality is AWESOME even at 256k
Yes the new RealMedia codec looks amazing! Also Flash is another good alternative that has pretty small file sizes and good quality.
I'm running AVI files with the Xvid codec.
Bloopers-Clips and Quickies- 1 1/2 to 12mb
Regular Girls 15 to 40mb.
Leanna Vids 20 to 60mb.
Nudist Camp clips 1 1/2 to 40mb.
Monthy featuers at 100mb plus.
Plus I got Real Player section that all off the hook too..
Did I say off the hook?
Oh well. :wacko:
Just passin thru folks... Have good evening...
CanShakeIt - what size is that video? 320x240 or ???
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanShakeit
Yes it is. I kept them all the same screen size unless somebody askes for a speciality. Then I'll bump up the screen size, and file size for clearity.Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
We offer FIVE different sizes at the moment but I think that's a bit much. We add three new films per week so I spend my whole life rendering at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
I'd like to get down to two or maybe three, but that means picking the right ones. I guess a small file designed for dial-up users and then two larger ones, with a choice of format. Quicktime and MPG?
Can anyone tell me the difference between Mpeg 1 and 2 and 3 and 4?
5 sizes is way too much.
I'd stick to MOV and MPEG-1, the latter being the most compatible format that can play on any PC - windows, osx, linux etc.
The difference between MPEG-1, MPEG-2, MPEG-4 is in the encoding algorithym.
MPEG-1 being the oldest format hense more compatible with everyone, the files tend to be larger for the quality offered though.
MPEG-2 is what TV stations, DVDs and TV beamed down from a satellite use. HDTV is also MPEG-2 based, your digitical cable as well. Unless the user has DVD player don't offer them MPEG-2 encoded videos.
MPEG-4 is the latest and it differs in the encoding algorithym. Instead of looking at every frame, it looks for the objects that are in the frame. Any object that remains relatively the same gets re-used
DivX and XviD are MPEG-4 based, and so is Quicktime 6.5
The new standart is MPEG-4/AVC part10 which is even better than the previous MPEG-4 codec and will probably be used in broadcast media by next year. At least by DirecTV
So in short for best compatibility stick to MPEG-1. WMV for best size but it might not play everywhere
You'll get feedback all over the place as far what codes, what format, what sizes etc, etc.. "That's just my opnion"Quote:
Originally Posted by BritishTwinks
Now I have to admit I haven't read up on this for awhile. But there's 2 primary reasons I mix up the file sizes so drasticly.
1. Beacuse it let's you use all your footage, which makes it simplier to just capture a piece, tag it with your url, and render it out in what ever size.
2. (And again, I haven't read up on it for awhile) But the mass download programs that surfers use like GetRight etc, etc go from one file to the next when loading out your members area. Well the surfer sets those programs for a spefic sizes. If you mix up the the file sizes it chokes them down and they abort the download. (but read up this might have changed)
But if you update your members area weekly for instence on a specific day and all your members relize this, and there mass downloading. What happens is you'll get 25 or 30 guys in there pulling all your fresh videos off at one time and it pulls you server down.
Just my 2 cents, but I'd read up on the download programs out here now. I've managed to curb that problem doing it the way I've mentioned here anyway. I run out a fresh 100 mb plus file ever month on the first and that's it. Even doing that there like flys to honey. It just depends on the time of day I throw the link out to them.
All this is just my 2 cents though.
320x240 is just not exciting anymore - especially on 1024x768. when i see videos sized like these, even I want to join a site!
http://www.allamericanguys.com/multimediapreview.htm
http://www.malemuscle.tv/newpreview/MMPREVIEW.html
Yep, I understand just want you mean about the size thing. You can max the player screen, but the quality isnt the best that way. Then you get into the ting about what player your using, what codec, etc.
See what I'm looking at is this, and this is just me now. But our content is extreamly rare, and with as many of these new programs out that let the surfer burn his/her own DVD's from a playlist. That makes me a little nervous really. I want them join, look around, make a playlist and let ME send them a DVD. ;)
i'm thinking about offering my vids in two formats at two speeds. The higher quality vid would be around 100kb per sec of video. My vids will be in quicktime and windows media formats just to make sure that users on both macs and windows will be able to view them (should i be concerned about any other OS's or are these two formats together enough?)
a stupid question...what does it really mean when a website offers a video at 512k (or 256k) for example? what would a 6mb per min (100kb per sec) video be considered?
Don't want to be a thread hijacker but ... I'm looking at video issues and wondering if there is a way to serve up Real files without using a Real streaming server?
wmv (streaming only): we offer two to three choices: low (320x240), medium (640x480) and high (720x480)
mpeg/mpg (download only): only high (720x480)
GPallan - the HIGHER quality will be 100k? that is lower than most sites' lower quality.
GPallan, imo you are worrying WAY too much here about what transfer will cost. when our highest quality videos were 768 kbps, our average member used less than one dollar per month of bandwidth. if you make your members look forward to seeing your videos, you will probably see a lot more retention.
good stuff! what is the speed of your low quality?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paco
the speed of a snail travelling against the wind ... 56kQuote:
Originally Posted by basschick
http://www.cockscash.com/rotf.gif http://www.cockscash.com/rotf.gif http://www.cockscash.com/rotf.gif
the dialup videos appear higher quality at a smaller size (160x120) but to a lot of people, bigger = better. quality? quantity? what's a webmaster to do? :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paco
That's why I mentioned answers to this kinda questoins go off the hook!Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
Video has already drove me crazy a time or 40.. :wacko:
I figured you knowned THAT by now!
Bawhahahaa!:thumbsup:
i'm totally confused Basschick. i thought that 100kb/sec is HUGE. ??? from my calculations, that's much larger than what most other sits offer. For example, after looking at some sites vids at 325k and 512k and then taking their file size to length of video ratios (ie. total file size divided by the length of the video), i only get 84kb/sec for the 512k vid and 38kb/sec for the 325k vid. Am i doing this correctly?Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
So if i'm getting this correct, a 10 min vid at your above 768 kbps, would be about 460MB (600sec x 768kb/sec). That can't be correct can it?
GPallan...
What are you editing with?
What codec are you using?
What type of file are you rendering?
Sorry BritishTwinks, i know this is a getting a little off topic...Quote:
Originally Posted by CanShakeit
i'm editing using Vegas 5.0. I then render a raw AVI file captured straight from a mini dv (after i print the final edited vid back onto a mini dv using Vegas) using Sorenson Squeeze 4. What codecs? i use the 512k windows media stream and the 512k quicktime stream with a bit of tweaking.
But this is not were i'm confused....i'm confused as to what 256k, 512k, etc speeds are referring to. If they're referring to kb per sec of video...i don't understand how that could be true because in that case, a 10 min 512k vid would be about 307mb. Am i not getting something here??? does 512k refer to something else (internet connection speed?) other than the actual size of the final video?
God I feel soooo stupid right now :goof:
can you post a small clip?
the bottom line is how it looks and how it plays. your surfers won't know or care about the rest ;)
It sounds like your rendering out “uncompressed” Avi files.
Those are Hugh, and there meant to print back to the tape, not download.
If your using Vegas you should be able to render directly from the timeline.
You go to file… Render as...
The second menu down is “Save as type”
In the "Save as type" pull down menu are the different formats.
Have you tried simply rendering the file out to a standard Mpeg-1 or 2, or even a Real Player file?
And hell, don’t feel stupid. I bang my head on the desk everyday!
You not by chance using a free version that's timed out are you?
We are running all our video in Flash in 800 x 450 and have great quality. The problem we are running into is that there is a huge variety of download speeds. Once the entire thing has downloaded it is smooth as silk, but for some folks (seems about 15%) they just chug slowly along. How are you providing really great quality and size and yet keeping your materials secure? All of our content is exclusive to our site.
www.manifestmen.com
hey, Alex_Manifest_M - you gonna have an affiliate program up soon? your tour isn't great, but your content will speak for itself :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex_Manifest_M
We add content each week. 100 exclusive images of our models and one additional 18 - 25 min video. We currently have about 5 hours of video. Not a bit of filler...lol. Once we have 10 hours of video we should be ready to start affiliate program. We are working on our tour. It will get better. But I have only been at this for a couple months. Never designed a site before, nor edited video. But I would put our up against any other muscle worship material out there....just selling what I know best: content for the muscle fan.
I got some great ideas / feedback on our site earlier and am making those changes.
Our muscle webcam site (www.manifestmuscle.com) has been up for 10 months and is doing great.
A.
We offer real player, window media and very interested in flash as well.. and we are working on that!!
LOL im sorry you had to run into this task LOL as I just helped ona big upgrading and resizing tasks LOL it was so long and monotonous LOL for sure... and boring I hated it but had to be done for tons of stuff!!
UGH!! I had to even re edit so stuff.. But im pretty quick about that shit.. LOL I feel your pain!!
The vids seem so easy to "lift" in other formats.....are we wrong in thinking that the latest flash is a bit harder for most to "harvest"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GPallan
I think you're confusing kilobits with kilobytes?
Video streaming is referred to in kiloBITS. A typical 512k stream (512 kilobits per second) is equal to 64 kiloBYTES (8 bits = 1 byte).
A 10 minute 768k video would only be about 50 MB or so.
so....
when will you start your affiliate program?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex_Manifest_M
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex_Manifest_M
I have heard that is much harder to " lift" flash video than others... And there is also new DRM technology's for flash as well! It is something to consider!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
Based on our current installation schedule, we expect to have adequate content March 17th.
DRM for flash huh? Wonder where I can check into that?
still hunting for drm for quicktime.....some love the flash videos we have but folks with slow downloads are screaming bloody murder