-
Compressing video for web
I’m trying to compress a 35 second piece of video for the web. I want to test it in two different ways so that each peice is hopefully under 10mb. Right now as an exported FCP quicktime file it’s 146mb.
1) I wanted to test it as an mpeg-1 file
2) I want to test it as a compressed quicktime file.I’ve used FCP’s Compresser for MPEG-1, but the quality is not that great. And I also can’t seem to figure out how to compress it into a less than 10mb quicktime file. Is it possible to acheive either of these and have the quality be there too?
In truth, I was looking at this website: https://www.sarlasmusic.com/look.html and saw how beautiful the quality was on these small quicktime files. How’d they do that!?!?!
Any help you could give me would be great! Thanks!
Sal
-
10 Replies
-
QuickTime Pro – QT Movies from FCP at KenStone.net
HTH,
BryceDon’t worry Mr. B. I have a cunning plan…
PowerBook 1.67 Ghz ATI 9700 128 MB 2 GB
Final Cut Pro HD
DVD Studio Pro 3
Motion -
Quicktime Sorenson Pro Codec using 2 pass VBR. You either have to buy the Pro codec from Sorenson or buy Sorenson Squeeze which comes with it. The Sorenson “standard” codec won’t look as good. You ain’t going to get that file size/quality from MPEG1 encoding and neither did they.
H.264 would be better but the user would have to have Quicktime 7.
Windows Media 9 would look good to but you’d have to buy Flip4Mac.
-
MPEG-4V Video
360×240
29.97fps
AAC, Stereo, 44.1 kHz
Data Rate 1085.7 kbits/secThere’s your settings. That’s a very high data rate he’s using for the frame size.
Go to their website. Play the video. View/View Source – in Safari. Look for the link. Cut and paste it into Quicktime Player – File/Open URL
When movie is loaded into QuickTime player – Window/Show Movie Info
You get the info you needhttps://www.sarlasmusic.com/video/media/“name_of_his_video.mov”
if that helps -
https://www.metv.ws/ms_vid_3.html
320 x 240
Sorenson Video 3, 2 pass VBR
750 kbits/s
AAC Stereo 22 khz -
Hi bockos,
Those links are Sorenson 3 not Sorenson 3 Pro?
High data rate. Do you think slower DSL would handle it?
-
Pro and progressive download. Slower DSL (368 or so) may have to wait a bit for QT to cache the data. We have tested many data rates for the football games. The current data rate is necessary for the action, poorly lit stadiums and grass. We have also compressed the games using h.264, which is much better at the same data rate IMHO. We will start to offer the h.264 files in the near future once QT 7 has had a chance to reach more users.
-
A crew of eight high school students and four station employees produces these games.
-
I see the tiniest bit of blockiness on some of the graphic fade ups. You’re right about action and data rate. I don’t like to go below 500kbps myself unless it’s talking head stuff. I really can’t understand why people go lower. Have you gotten any complaints about slow loads from folks accessing it?
Any reason why you chose Quicktime over Windows Media 9? For sports Quicktime gives the user frame by frame jogging but soooo many folks just want Windows Media.
-
EXCELLENT production value. Surprising for High School sport. This accolade is coming from the former Video Engineer at Major League Baseball (Baseball Max & This Week in Baseball as well as the league distributed scoreboard stuff).
-
QuickTime is a better tool IMHO and to be honest we just like it better. The Windows Media 9+ codec is awesome. However, Windows Media will not allow the user to scrub the video. If I had it my way the world would be using DivX.
I will pass on your kudos to our students.
Shawn Bockoven
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up