BoddaH1994 Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Ok, here's the deal-- The media team here really wants to make 2005 a big year for original videos, but we have a problem. It seems as though the trusty WMV files that people seem to count on really don't cut it for the PKIC standards that we like to hold for you guys. Unfortunately, it seems as though with WMV format, with any kind of decent resolution whatsoever, it's about 5megs per minute. Therefore, an average video will be 25 megs. Now, for the broadband users that can stream, it's not that big of a deal, but it makes a world of difference to dial up users. We are trying to make the new media open to all. Does anyone know of a file format that can maintain the integrity of sound and video, but be about 2-3megs per minute? Any input would be gratly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Ryan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKlockster Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Quicktime MPEG4. I know it can stream very well. If you used Quicktime streaming, with MPEG4, it would be great. I think Windows Media Player can open it as well. Its a standard format. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docdude316 Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Why is streaming necessary. i know that I prefer to download videos myself. It would also seem like that would save on bandwidth because once you download it once you don't have to again, unlike with streaming video where you have to download each time. I may be wrong about the bandwidth issue. I just know that I prefer to download a video over streaming it any day of the week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flightoffear1996 Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 You could just compross the videos and have them download. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoddaH1994 Posted December 31, 2004 Author Share Posted December 31, 2004 Why is streaming necessary. i know that I prefer to download videos myself. It would also seem like that would save on bandwidth because once you download it once you don't have to again, unlike with streaming video where you have to download each time. I may be wrong about the bandwidth issue. I just know that I prefer to download a video over streaming it any day of the week. You are absolutely correct. Bandwidth isn't really a big issue with us (sorry John!). We have more than enough with our service through Nexigen. Streaming just seems more convenient because you can watch the videos while you are downloading instead of waiting those endless minutes to watch it. Any more suggestions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PKIDelirium Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 It took me 5 hours to download the Flyers video on dialup Maybe the QT .mov format? I've seen that and it seems really good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flightoffear1996 Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 No one likes QT though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKlockster Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Quicktime is much better than WMP. WMP is a sub par excuse for a video program. Quicktime is MUCH more powerful. But this is typical. Look at Windows Movie Maker. It is a cheap and poorly disguised copy of Apple's iMovie. But don't get me started on Microsoft... I download the files at school, and save them on my tumb drive. So its no big deal for me either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docdude316 Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Personally I use Media Player Classic along with Real Alternative and Quicktime Alternative to play my movie files. I can play pretty much any file I come across with this one player. It's very convienient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleHenry Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Keep WMV. It has good quality. I'd rather wait for a good video than get a crappy one with little wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PKIDelirium Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 the WMV format is really strange. It's clunky, and has iffy quality at times. QT doesnt do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleHenry Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Um... no. That's called computer problems. The WMV format is perfectly fine. QT just sucks, cause Apple made it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoddaH1994 Posted December 31, 2004 Author Share Posted December 31, 2004 So you guys are saying that you'd rather have the files a larger size, but keep the quality that they're at now? As you may recall, for most of you it streamed. As far the dial up users.... sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleHenry Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Yes, I'd rather keep it as is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvesterofyoursorrow Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 QT sucks for PC's. DivX for downloading the vids, then WMV to stream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vortex Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 (edited) Does anyone know of a file format that can maintain the integrity of sound and video, but be about 2-3megs per minute? Sure but with smaller web-video looks bad. It’s a big problem a blur or pixels will start showing up in your video. While I was in college we ran into this problem a lot tiring to post work on the web. I would use QuickTime, MPG4, or WMV. Most of the time I used QuickTime or MPG4 hope that helps you out. Dial up is just to slow for video or what I have saw is two sets one is low for dial and the other is high-end for people with a fast line on the net. Send me a PM if you need any help. Edited December 31, 2004 by Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docdude316 Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 Does anyone know of a file format that can maintain the integrity of sound and video, but be about 2-3megs per minute? Sure but with smaller web-video looks bad. It’s a big problem a blur or pixels will start showing up in your video. While I was in college we ran into this problem a lot tiring to post work on the web. I would use QuickTime, MPG4, or WMV. Most of the time I used QuickTime or MPG4 hope that helps you out. Dial up is just to slow for video or what I have saw is two sets one is low for dial and the other is high-end for people with a fast line on the net. Send me a PM if you need any help. Since bandwidth doesn't seem to be a problem this seems like the best solution. Have both a low quality and a high quality stream. A downloadable file would also be nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKlockster Posted January 2, 2005 Share Posted January 2, 2005 (edited) Um... no. That's called computer problems. The WMV format is perfectly fine. QT just sucks, cause Apple made it. Ok - I'm not even going to start! I personally prefer Quicktime. But it seems that WMP or more accepted. I even have WMP on my iBook! Here is an idea. Can you possibly render two versions - a high quality and a low quality? Make the low quality really small - so its easily downloable for dialuppers, and a high quality version big so that broadband users can get the better quality. I think that would please everybody the best. I mean - its not like bandwith or storage is in short supply for you guys! Edit: Sorry - I didn't see the second page. Looks like someone beat me to it! But I seriously think this is the best option. Edited January 2, 2005 by TheKlockster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRickster Posted January 2, 2005 Share Posted January 2, 2005 So you guy's are going to be streaming video instead of just being able to download it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Posted January 2, 2005 Share Posted January 2, 2005 We will be doing both. The discussion is over format. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleHenry Posted January 2, 2005 Share Posted January 2, 2005 Like I said before, stick with the WMV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoddaH1994 Posted January 2, 2005 Author Share Posted January 2, 2005 WMV will be the likely way to go... here's the next question, and this mainly goes out to all of the broadband people out there... how big is TOO big when it comes to a video? Let's say regardless of the content. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docdude316 Posted January 2, 2005 Share Posted January 2, 2005 WMV will be the likely way to go... here's the next question, and this mainly goes out to all of the broadband people out there... how big is TOO big when it comes to a video? Let's say regardless of the content. I think that videos up to 50 MB are a problem at all. I've downloaded videos twice that size without a problem. One thing I might suggest is for large videos we could set up a bittorrent tracker, and then it might go a lot quicker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoddaH1994 Posted January 2, 2005 Author Share Posted January 2, 2005 WMV will be the likely way to go... here's the next question, and this mainly goes out to all of the broadband people out there... how big is TOO big when it comes to a video? Let's say regardless of the content. I think that videos up to 50 MB are a problem at all. I've downloaded videos twice that size without a problem. One thing I might suggest is for large videos we could set up a bittorrent tracker, and then it might go a lot quicker. Good idea... if we can figure out how to break it down into smaller parts, we may be able to swing that. On the other side, it's good that most of you have broadband and are able to stream for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vortex Posted January 2, 2005 Share Posted January 2, 2005 WMV will be the likely way to go... here's the next question, and this mainly goes out to all of the broadband people out there... how big is TOO big when it comes to a video? Let's say regardless of the content. Anything longer than 5 mins is way to long for web-video. If the video is longer than 5 mins brake it up into parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleHenry Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Size really doesn't matter much for me. I'd wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PKIDelirium Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Can't forget the dialup users! 50MB is WAY too big. 25MB is pushing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleHenry Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Don't you read? He said the size question was for BROADBAND USERS! God, pay attention for once! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.