Daniel Low
Forum Replies Created
-
You didn’t answer my second question relating to your settings:
2. When you say ‘8kf/s’ do you mean 8 keyframes per second or…..?
__________________________________________________________________
Please post back saying what solved your problem. It could help others, and saying ‘thanks’ is free! -
Flash is terribly inefficient when it comes to displaying video and some Flash players are more efficient than others, it may be that the one you are using is not the most efficient.
You’ll probably find that you can easily play the HD Quicktime trailers here:
https://www.apple.com/trailers/#section=justhdHowever it could also have something do with the way you encoded it.
I’d recommend using H.264 over VP6 but your mileage may vary, certainly the Exposureroom recommends it.
p.s. Thanks for your advice earlier but don’t preach to me ever again.
__________________________________________________________________
Please post back saying what solved your problem. It could help others, and saying ‘thanks’ is free! -
There’s not really much you can do about it.
While it’s possible to buy software that will allow you to encode H.264 at 4:4:4, it’s unlikely that a: that’s what the client wants, and b: that anything available freely will play it back.
The bottom line is the banding you are seeing is very slight in comparison to what other types of compression are going to do to really screw up your picture.
Even the best quality commercial DVDs show far, far worse banding than what you are experiencing.
__________________________________________________________________
Please post back saying what solved your problem. It could help others, and saying ‘thanks’ is free! -
DV is either progressive or interlaced, never something in between. Only certain DV cameras are capable of true progressive capture, others mimic the look of progressive by using different shutter speeds.
You can’t turn interlaced video into ‘true’ progressive video, something is always lost in the process of deinterlacing unless your video is totally motionless.
Premiere probably wants to render the the footage as it is actually interlaced and your project is set up as progressive.
There are loads of different ways to deinterlace, if you know your way around VirtualDub then there are some excellent deinterlace filters available for that you could use which don’t require you to convert to square pixel.
__________________________________________________________________
Please post back saying what solved your problem. It could help others, and saying ‘thanks’ is free! -
“Does somebody have a good test that can definitively demonstrate the artifacts of DV compression?”
Yes, try pulling of a difficult chromakey one through fine detail with lots of highlights.
“To explain- we’re selling our Avid Express DV system and switching over to Apple”
Good move.
“Along with keeping a backup of all the project and media files, we want to render out masters of the different films.
I’ve pushed for doing this with some sort of lossless codec like lagarith, or quicktime animation at 100%, or straight uncompressed- but we’ve got someone telling us that it will be no better quality than DV stream, and lossless (even with a good codec) will be a waste of space. His argument is that *everything* in Avid Express DV is internally stored as a DV stream anyway- so an export to a DV codec is 1:1 ”
If everything in the Avid is stored as 25Mb/s I frame the saving in another codec won’t improved the quality obviously, and will certainly need to be re-rendered when being brought back into a project in FCP.
Some would say to simply lay off all your media files back to DV tape or alternatively use a lossy but high quality quality codec like PhotoJPEG at above 75% quality. It’s fast and easily transportable.
“ I’m not totally convinced, as I’d think that effects would be done in the uncompressed memory buffer and then rendering out would re-compress this an additional time.”
Possibly, I’m not sure about the Avid, but I doubt it. Moving around uncompressed data is expensive for any system to perform. Low-end systems aren’t built to do this.
To test this I’d take a multi-layered project and render it out to DV and then take the same project and render it out to Animation, PhotoJPEG at 100% or uncompressed AVI and see if there’s any quality difference.Let us know your findings
__________________________________________________________________
Please post back saying what solved your problem. It could help others, and saying ‘thanks’ is free! -
Josh, that’s so funny, you had just replied to one of my posts before!
If you knew me you’d know I don’t need to ‘lighten up’, I just hate BS’ers
Happy crimbo mate.
__________________________________________________________________
Please post back saying what solved your problem. It could help others, and saying ‘thanks’ is free! -
I’m not writing them off so fast – I gave them a couple of years and in this industry that is a LONG time.
h.264 cannot handle alpha channel transparency.
Who really cares, it’s such a little used feature of VP6. (Yes I know, The Greatest Web Video Effect Ever, totally relies on it!)
Also according to ON2’s press vp8 can compress file size more and produce better image quality than h.264
Do you know how many companies make a claim like this every year? They can never ever back it up in a series of real-world tests.
There is a reason why H.264 is where it is, it because 100’s if not 1000’s of experts from 100’s of different organisations have spent years perfecting what they know to a point where they can call a group of technologies ‘H.264’ and make it an international standard.
Do you really think that a handful of experts at On2 can do that much better, and make a difference, and if they could, don’t you think the ITU-T/ISO/IEC JVT or whoever would have snapped them up long ago??
I would think that youtube made the choice because of licensing and because iphone and ipod does not support flash and since the HQ format was initially conceived for the apple syndication partnership.
Huh?
Do you know anything about the MPEG-LA?
Did you know that Facebook are using H.264?
Flickr, who are owned by Yahoo use H.264..
Microsoft lets H.264 work in Silverlight.
Are they all members of this ‘secret’ “apple syndication partnership”?
__________________________________________________________________
Please post back saying what solved your problem. It could help others, and saying ‘thanks’ is free! -
Hardware based solutions are not the answer for file based transcoding or encoding.
Scaleable software that can take advantage of multiple processors AND multiple cores is the way forward. Being able to split long jobs over different servers AND cores over fast networks is where this stuff is already being done, and at relatively low cost.Even very small companies are making use of this technology. Take a few nicely spec’d Mac Pros and compressor with Qmaster and you have a pretty serious gridded encoding farm.
Squeeze is for amateur wedding video producers and the like, no offense, but I consider it to be what I call ‘Mickey Mouse’. That said, it’s an extremely popular piece of software, but so is Windows! Go figure!
__________________________________________________________________
Please post back saying what solved your problem. It could help others, and saying ‘thanks’ is free! -
Now that Flash video can use H.264, one would expect to see the demise of On2 and VP6x series of codecs over the next couple of years at the most.
Look at YouTube for example, who missed out on On2 completely and went from Spark to x264.
Another nail in the coffin for On2 (much as I love what the company has done over the years) is the acceptance of H.264 into Silverlight.
Let’s face it, H.264 is going to be the dominant format, for many years to come, across many different platforms, even Microsoft have had to concede, and that’s probably a first!
__________________________________________________________________
Please post back saying what solved your problem. It could help others, and saying ‘thanks’ is free! -
With Flash video, moving around the timeline only moves between keyframes, video keyframes not animation keyframes. So if you have a keyframe set every 10 seconds then that’s roughly how far you jump each time. In order to scrub through every frame (outside of QT Player) you’ll need to create a complex custom player (which will be pretty slow to show each frame) or set each frame as a keyframe, which would be totally pointless.
Bottom line is that Flash is not the right format to use if you want to do this sort of thing.
__________________________________________________________________
Please post back saying what solved your problem. It could help others, and saying ‘thanks’ is free!