Compression Bitrates

Discussion in 'Amateur Video Production' started by Gary Eickmeier, Apr 30, 2011.

  1. I'm not sure how to say this one without exposing my ignorance
    unnecessarily, but I am sometimes without a paddle on bitrates when I am
    trying to convert/compress a video into another format. I have several
    programs on my computer that can convert video files, and there are so many
    formats and purposes for these conversions that the program cannot always
    give you a ballpark number in the presets.

    For example, I have finished editing a Hi Def video, and I want to convert
    it to Windows Media File, or Quicktime. I can figure out most everything
    except when it asks me what bitrate I want, or it offers me a very low
    bitrate in the presets, it hits me cold what a good figure would be. What I
    want is a simple table for most situations with bitrates for upper and lower
    quality limits of the various formats. So it might say, Windows Media Video,
    Hi Def, full frame, you want 2000 to 5000 kbps.

    I realize that I could make my own table after a lot of experimentation, but
    why don't The Videoguys or someone already have such tables? My Premiere
    textbooks aren't real helpful either. Perhaps there is a website that lays
    this out for me. Anyone know?

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Apr 30, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Gary Eickmeier

    Smarty Guest

    On 4/30/2011 12:47 AM, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
    > I'm not sure how to say this one without exposing my ignorance
    > unnecessarily, but I am sometimes without a paddle on bitrates when I am
    > trying to convert/compress a video into another format. I have several
    > programs on my computer that can convert video files, and there are so many
    > formats and purposes for these conversions that the program cannot always
    > give you a ballpark number in the presets.
    >
    > For example, I have finished editing a Hi Def video, and I want to convert
    > it to Windows Media File, or Quicktime. I can figure out most everything
    > except when it asks me what bitrate I want, or it offers me a very low
    > bitrate in the presets, it hits me cold what a good figure would be. What I
    > want is a simple table for most situations with bitrates for upper and lower
    > quality limits of the various formats. So it might say, Windows Media Video,
    > Hi Def, full frame, you want 2000 to 5000 kbps.
    >
    > I realize that I could make my own table after a lot of experimentation, but
    > why don't The Videoguys or someone already have such tables? My Premiere
    > textbooks aren't real helpful either. Perhaps there is a website that lays
    > this out for me. Anyone know?
    >
    > Gary Eickmeier
    >
    >

    Gary,
    The information below is copied directly from Wikipedia/Bitrates
    description of bitrates for audio and video. Other "rules of thumb" and
    ball-park estimates can be found with Googling "typical video bitrates".


    Video

    * 16 kbit/s – videophone <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videophone>
    quality (minimum necessary for a consumer-acceptable "talking
    head" picture using various video compression schemes)
    * 128 – 384 kbit/s – business-oriented videoconferencing
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videoconferencing> quality using
    video compression
    * 1.15 Mbit/s max – VCD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VCD> quality
    (using MPEG1 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-1>
    compression)^[6] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-5>
    * 3.5 Mbit/s typ - Standard-definition television
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard-definition_television>
    quality (with bit-rate reduction from MPEG-2 compression)
    * 9.8 Mbit/s max – DVD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD> (using
    MPEG2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2> compression)^[7]
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-6>
    * 8 to 15 Mbit/s typ – HDTV
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television> quality
    (with bit-rate reduction from MPEG-4 AVC compression)
    * 19 Mbit/s approximate - HDV <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDV>
    720p (using MPEG2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2>
    compression)^[8]
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-hdv-info.org-7>
    * 24 Mbit/s max - AVCHD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD> (using
    MPEG4 AVC <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC>
    compression)^[9] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-8>
    * 25 Mbit/s approximate - HDV <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDV>
    1080i (using MPEG2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2>
    compression)^[8]
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-hdv-info.org-7>
    * 29.4 Mbit/s max – HD DVD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD>
    * 40 Mbit/s max – Blu-ray Disc
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc> (using MPEG2
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2>, AVC
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC> or VC-1
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VC-1> compression)^[10]
    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-9>
     
    Smarty, Apr 30, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Smarty" <> wrote in message
    news:ipg4g9$khk$...
    > On 4/30/2011 12:47 AM, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
    >> I'm not sure how to say this one without exposing my ignorance
    >> unnecessarily, but I am sometimes without a paddle on bitrates when I am
    >> trying to convert/compress a video into another format. I have several
    >> programs on my computer that can convert video files, and there are so
    >> many
    >> formats and purposes for these conversions that the program cannot always
    >> give you a ballpark number in the presets.
    >>
    >> For example, I have finished editing a Hi Def video, and I want to
    >> convert
    >> it to Windows Media File, or Quicktime. I can figure out most everything
    >> except when it asks me what bitrate I want, or it offers me a very low
    >> bitrate in the presets, it hits me cold what a good figure would be. What
    >> I
    >> want is a simple table for most situations with bitrates for upper and
    >> lower
    >> quality limits of the various formats. So it might say, Windows Media
    >> Video,
    >> Hi Def, full frame, you want 2000 to 5000 kbps.
    >>
    >> I realize that I could make my own table after a lot of experimentation,
    >> but
    >> why don't The Videoguys or someone already have such tables? My Premiere
    >> textbooks aren't real helpful either. Perhaps there is a website that
    >> lays
    >> this out for me. Anyone know?
    >>
    >> Gary Eickmeier
    >>
    >>

    > Gary,
    > The information below is copied directly from Wikipedia/Bitrates
    > description of bitrates for audio and video. Other "rules of thumb" and
    > ball-park estimates can be found with Googling "typical video bitrates".
    >
    >
    > Video
    >
    > * 16 kbit/s - videophone <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videophone>
    > quality (minimum necessary for a consumer-acceptable "talking
    > head" picture using various video compression schemes)
    > * 128 - 384 kbit/s - business-oriented videoconferencing
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videoconferencing> quality using
    > video compression
    > * 1.15 Mbit/s max - VCD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VCD> quality
    > (using MPEG1 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-1>
    > compression)^[6] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-5>
    > * 3.5 Mbit/s typ - Standard-definition television
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard-definition_television>
    > quality (with bit-rate reduction from MPEG-2 compression)
    > * 9.8 Mbit/s max - DVD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD> (using
    > MPEG2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2> compression)^[7]
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-6>
    > * 8 to 15 Mbit/s typ - HDTV
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television> quality
    > (with bit-rate reduction from MPEG-4 AVC compression)
    > * 19 Mbit/s approximate - HDV <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDV>
    > 720p (using MPEG2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2>
    > compression)^[8]
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-hdv-info.org-7>
    > * 24 Mbit/s max - AVCHD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD> (using
    > MPEG4 AVC <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC>
    > compression)^[9] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-8>
    > * 25 Mbit/s approximate - HDV <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDV>
    > 1080i (using MPEG2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2>
    > compression)^[8]
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-hdv-info.org-7>
    > * 29.4 Mbit/s max - HD DVD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD>
    > * 40 Mbit/s max - Blu-ray Disc
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc> (using MPEG2
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2>, AVC
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC> or VC-1
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VC-1> compression)^[10]
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-9>
    >


    So now you see what I mean. I don't believe all of this table. DVD I know is
    between 2 and 4 Mbit/s, not 9.8. And where are the compressed formats, WMV
    and Quicktime? Again, my example problem was I have made a Hi Def video and
    I want to convert it to WMV at full frame size, 29.97 fps, high quality. How
    would you look that up on that table?

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Apr 30, 2011
    #3
  4. Gary Eickmeier

    BJ Guest

    On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 01:36:57 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
    <> wrote:

    >So now you see what I mean. I don't believe all of this table. DVD I know is
    >between 2 and 4 Mbit/s, not 9.8. And where are the compressed formats, WMV
    >and Quicktime? Again, my example problem was I have made a Hi Def video and
    >I want to convert it to WMV at full frame size, 29.97 fps, high quality. How
    >would you look that up on that table?
    >
    >Gary Eickmeier
    >


    I believe the values Smarty posted are maximum values. The DVD's you
    watch may be between 2-4 mb/s, but the maximum value for DVD (which
    is mpeg2 ONLY) is 9.8 mb/s. (8 mb/s video, 1.8 mb/s audio, iirc.)

    THAT'S PART OF THE DVD STANDARD. If you don't know what the
    standards are for the different formats, then you're probably
    going to have difficulties to start with.

    Those formats which he posted are *all* standard formats. Once you
    start transcoding into wmv (don't know about quicktime, but it's
    probably the same), you can create any video size at any bit rate,
    so there are *no* standards.

    Also remember detail is what really pushes bit-rates. A video of
    a stationary white wall can have a lower bit rate than a moving
    crowd scene while still showing the same amount of detail. It's
    how the compression formats work. So trying to get someone
    to tell you what values you should use for your video is probably
    useless.

    I'd take a few short clips and transcode to the final format you
    want using several bit rates and look at the results. You're
    the final arbiter on what the final result should look like anyway.
    You can make your video look anywhere from a netflix stream to
    Blu-Ray. There are those who think a stream from netflix is all
    the resolution they'd ever want...

    BJ
    --
    I have nothing important to say...
     
    BJ, Apr 30, 2011
    #4
  5. Gary Eickmeier

    Mxsmanic Guest

    The problem is that there's no direct correlation between image quality,
    resolution, frame rates, etc., and bitrates.

    Most good, modern compression algorithms produce bitstreams of variable
    length, depending on the nature of the input and the degree of compression
    chosen through various variables used by the algorithm.

    The complexity of the original content is very important for most algorithms.
    A static title on the screen compresses much more dramatically than a screen
    that shows random static or snow (which typically cannot be compressed at
    all). This implies that, for example, a sports video won't compress as much as
    a video slideshow of landscapes. The bitrate will thus vary depending on the
    type of video content being compressed.

    When bitrates are given, they are usually the maximum rates the equipment can
    handle or the worst-case rates for compression of any likely real-world
    content.

    The Wikipedia table numbers are just ballpark estimates, for the reasons
    stated above.
     
    Mxsmanic, Apr 30, 2011
    #5
  6. "Gary Eickmeier" <> wrote in message
    news:1bNup.33209$...
    > "Smarty" <> wrote in message
    > news:ipg4g9$khk$...
    >> On 4/30/2011 12:47 AM, Gary Eickmeier wrote:


    >>> I'm not sure how to say this one without exposing my ignorance
    >>> unnecessarily, but I am sometimes without a paddle on bitrates when I am
    >>> trying to convert/compress a video into another format. I have several
    >>> programs on my computer that can convert video files, and there are so
    >>> many
    >>> formats and purposes for these conversions that the program cannot
    >>> always
    >>> give you a ballpark number in the presets.
    >>>
    >>> For example, I have finished editing a Hi Def video, and I want to
    >>> convert
    >>> it to Windows Media File, or Quicktime. I can figure out most everything
    >>> except when it asks me what bitrate I want, or it offers me a very low
    >>> bitrate in the presets, it hits me cold what a good figure would be.
    >>> What I
    >>> want is a simple table for most situations with bitrates for upper and
    >>> lower
    >>> quality limits of the various formats. So it might say, Windows Media
    >>> Video,
    >>> Hi Def, full frame, you want 2000 to 5000 kbps.
    >>>
    >>> I realize that I could make my own table after a lot of experimentation,
    >>> but
    >>> why don't The Videoguys or someone already have such tables? My Premiere
    >>> textbooks aren't real helpful either. Perhaps there is a website that
    >>> lays
    >>> this out for me. Anyone know?
    >>>
    >>> Gary Eickmeier


    >> Gary,
    >> The information below is copied directly from Wikipedia/Bitrates
    >> description of bitrates for audio and video. Other "rules of thumb" and
    >> ball-park estimates can be found with Googling "typical video bitrates".
    >>
    >> Video
    >>
    >> * 16 kbit/s - videophone <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videophone>
    >> quality (minimum necessary for a consumer-acceptable "talking
    >> head" picture using various video compression schemes)
    >> * 128 - 384 kbit/s - business-oriented videoconferencing
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videoconferencing> quality using
    >> video compression
    >> * 1.15 Mbit/s max - VCD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VCD> quality
    >> (using MPEG1 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-1>
    >> compression)^[6] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-5>
    >> * 3.5 Mbit/s typ - Standard-definition television
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard-definition_television>
    >> quality (with bit-rate reduction from MPEG-2 compression)
    >> * 9.8 Mbit/s max - DVD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD> (using
    >> MPEG2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2> compression)^[7]
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-6>
    >> * 8 to 15 Mbit/s typ - HDTV
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television> quality
    >> (with bit-rate reduction from MPEG-4 AVC compression)
    >> * 19 Mbit/s approximate - HDV <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDV>
    >> 720p (using MPEG2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2>
    >> compression)^[8]
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-hdv-info.org-7>
    >> * 24 Mbit/s max - AVCHD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD> (using
    >> MPEG4 AVC <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC>
    >> compression)^[9] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-8>
    >> * 25 Mbit/s approximate - HDV <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDV>
    >> 1080i (using MPEG2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2>
    >> compression)^[8]
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-hdv-info.org-7>
    >> * 29.4 Mbit/s max - HD DVD <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD>
    >> * 40 Mbit/s max - Blu-ray Disc
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc> (using MPEG2
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG2>, AVC
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC> or VC-1
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VC-1> compression)^[10]
    >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#cite_note-9>


    > So now you see what I mean. I don't believe all of this table. DVD I know
    > is between 2 and 4 Mbit/s, not 9.8. And where are the compressed formats,
    > WMV and Quicktime? Again, my example problem was I have made a Hi Def
    > video and I want to convert it to WMV at full frame size, 29.97 fps, high
    > quality. How would you look that up on that table?
    >
    > Gary Eickmeier


    [BJ's response:
    "I believe the values Smarty posted are maximum values. The DVD's you
    watch may be between 2-4 mb/s, but the maximum value for DVD (which
    is mpeg2 ONLY) is 9.8 mb/s. (8 mb/s video, 1.8 mb/s audio, iirc.)

    THAT'S PART OF THE DVD STANDARD. If you don't know what the
    standards are for the different formats, then you're probably
    going to have difficulties to start with.

    Those formats which he posted are *all* standard formats. Once you
    start transcoding into wmv (don't know about quicktime, but it's
    probably the same), you can create any video size at any bit rate,
    so there are *no* standards.

    Also remember detail is what really pushes bit-rates. A video of
    a stationary white wall can have a lower bit rate than a moving
    crowd scene while still showing the same amount of detail. It's
    how the compression formats work. So trying to get someone
    to tell you what values you should use for your video is probably
    useless.

    I'd take a few short clips and transcode to the final format you
    want using several bit rates and look at the results. You're
    the final arbiter on what the final result should look like anyway.
    You can make your video look anywhere from a netflix stream to
    Blu-Ray. There are those who think a stream from netflix is all
    the resolution they'd ever want...

    BJ"]

    For Gary, I do as "BJ" suggests, and take a *short* clip of high
    quality and detail (with motion in part of it), and I convert it to
    whatever I want to try (within the limits of the maximum data
    rate for the new format, or the lower data rate I want to try out)
    and return it to the timeline in synch with the original. I may try
    several different transcodes, each on a new track in synch with
    the original clip. Once on the timeline, I choose a particularly
    detailed frame in the original to place the cursor on, which then
    (using a 1920x1080 LCD monitor for the video) permits me to
    see the differences when tracks are switched on/off to compare
    their contents with the original material. It can also be useful to
    play the tracks (assuming that their formats play smoothly from
    the timeline - or in the case of Vegas, RAM previews can be
    made to guarantee smooth playback) to see what the clips
    look like in motion.
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, Apr 30, 2011
    #6
  7. Gary Eickmeier

    Guest

    On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 00:47:15 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
    <> wrote:

    >I'm not sure how to say this one without exposing my ignorance
    >unnecessarily, but I am sometimes without a paddle on bitrates when I am
    >trying to convert/compress a video into another format. I have several
    >programs on my computer that can convert video files, and there are so many
    >formats and purposes for these conversions that the program cannot always
    >give you a ballpark number in the presets.
    >
    >For example, I have finished editing a Hi Def video, and I want to convert
    >it to Windows Media File, or Quicktime. I can figure out most everything
    >except when it asks me what bitrate I want, or it offers me a very low
    >bitrate in the presets, it hits me cold what a good figure would be. What I
    >want is a simple table for most situations with bitrates for upper and lower
    >quality limits of the various formats. So it might say, Windows Media Video,
    >Hi Def, full frame, you want 2000 to 5000 kbps.
    >
    >I realize that I could make my own table after a lot of experimentation, but
    >why don't The Videoguys or someone already have such tables? My Premiere
    >textbooks aren't real helpful either. Perhaps there is a website that lays
    >this out for me. Anyone know?
    >
    >Gary Eickmeier
    >


    I've never worked with WMV or QT video but have converted analog and
    HDTV video captures using either h.263 or h.264 DivX codecs. My
    intent was merely to reduce file size but with as little sacrifice in
    quality as possible. At the very least this meant to me that I needed
    a two pass encoder and a suggested bit range that would accommodate
    what I perceived to be typical lighting and motion for the shows I was
    going to convert. However, it was still necessary to tweak the
    average for those videos which were obviously outside those
    parameters, namely more motion and/or darker scenes; underwater and
    gradient coloring, such as sky and painted walls, require another
    tweak to minimize stair stepping.

    One early HD effort was a PBS video of the Monterey Aquarium when they
    first introduced a Great White Shark to their collection. This HDTV
    show was captured by a Hauppauge analog-to-digital USB box via SVideo
    from a Motorola HD-DVR and the resulting 13 mbps CBR MPEG2 file was
    then compressed to 2 mbps VBR. This 50 minute video still shows very
    well on a 55" HDTV.

    In the long run, I settled on a typical range of 8000 (for the very
    dark or fast scenes) to 1000 (for their opposites) with a target size
    of about 25% of the original. Originally using Flask-MPEG and
    eventually VDub-MPEG, both with DivX h.263 codecs. The container used
    was .AVI. The process typically consumed 2.5x playtime on P4 type
    CPUs.

    Lately, I've tested DivX's h.264 converter which does superb one pass
    work at about 4:1 reduction in size but, sadly, takes 5x play time on
    a 2 GHz quad to produce this result. The PC used has an h.264 decoder
    in its GPU but is of little use for making h.264 encodings. The
    container used is .MKV.

    However, with the capacity and price of HDD dramatically outstripping
    optical media, I've long ago stopped converting anything from its
    captured bit rate and quality. With 2 TB drives now below $80 there's
    little concern should another disc or more be needed for the library.
    While AVI, MPG, MKV, and TS files (among others) cannot be played
    without the user needing a codec or piece of hardware to assist, its
    not been a major hurdle to us. We often take along a few hard drives,
    an IcyDock single bay transport, and a WD TV Live Plus player to
    entertain others in their homes or a vacation spot.
     
    , Apr 30, 2011
    #7
  8. Gary Eickmeier

    Smarty Guest

    On 4/30/2011 12:03 PM, wrote:
    > On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 00:47:15 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> I'm not sure how to say this one without exposing my ignorance
    >> unnecessarily, but I am sometimes without a paddle on bitrates when I am
    >> trying to convert/compress a video into another format. I have several
    >> programs on my computer that can convert video files, and there are so many
    >> formats and purposes for these conversions that the program cannot always
    >> give you a ballpark number in the presets.
    >>
    >> For example, I have finished editing a Hi Def video, and I want to convert
    >> it to Windows Media File, or Quicktime. I can figure out most everything
    >> except when it asks me what bitrate I want, or it offers me a very low
    >> bitrate in the presets, it hits me cold what a good figure would be. What I
    >> want is a simple table for most situations with bitrates for upper and lower
    >> quality limits of the various formats. So it might say, Windows Media Video,
    >> Hi Def, full frame, you want 2000 to 5000 kbps.
    >>
    >> I realize that I could make my own table after a lot of experimentation, but
    >> why don't The Videoguys or someone already have such tables? My Premiere
    >> textbooks aren't real helpful either. Perhaps there is a website that lays
    >> this out for me. Anyone know?
    >>
    >> Gary Eickmeier
    >>

    > I've never worked with WMV or QT video but have converted analog and
    > HDTV video captures using either h.263 or h.264 DivX codecs. My
    > intent was merely to reduce file size but with as little sacrifice in
    > quality as possible. At the very least this meant to me that I needed
    > a two pass encoder and a suggested bit range that would accommodate
    > what I perceived to be typical lighting and motion for the shows I was
    > going to convert. However, it was still necessary to tweak the
    > average for those videos which were obviously outside those
    > parameters, namely more motion and/or darker scenes; underwater and
    > gradient coloring, such as sky and painted walls, require another
    > tweak to minimize stair stepping.
    >
    > One early HD effort was a PBS video of the Monterey Aquarium when they
    > first introduced a Great White Shark to their collection. This HDTV
    > show was captured by a Hauppauge analog-to-digital USB box via SVideo
    > from a Motorola HD-DVR and the resulting 13 mbps CBR MPEG2 file was
    > then compressed to 2 mbps VBR. This 50 minute video still shows very
    > well on a 55" HDTV.
    >
    > In the long run, I settled on a typical range of 8000 (for the very
    > dark or fast scenes) to 1000 (for their opposites) with a target size
    > of about 25% of the original. Originally using Flask-MPEG and
    > eventually VDub-MPEG, both with DivX h.263 codecs. The container used
    > was .AVI. The process typically consumed 2.5x playtime on P4 type
    > CPUs.
    >
    > Lately, I've tested DivX's h.264 converter which does superb one pass
    > work at about 4:1 reduction in size but, sadly, takes 5x play time on
    > a 2 GHz quad to produce this result. The PC used has an h.264 decoder
    > in its GPU but is of little use for making h.264 encodings. The
    > container used is .MKV.
    >
    > However, with the capacity and price of HDD dramatically outstripping
    > optical media, I've long ago stopped converting anything from its
    > captured bit rate and quality. With 2 TB drives now below $80 there's
    > little concern should another disc or more be needed for the library.
    > While AVI, MPG, MKV, and TS files (among others) cannot be played
    > without the user needing a codec or piece of hardware to assist, its
    > not been a major hurdle to us. We often take along a few hard drives,
    > an IcyDock single bay transport, and a WD TV Live Plus player to
    > entertain others in their homes or a vacation spot.


    Gary, et al,

    Sorry if my prior reply was too pithy and overly simplistic. I entirely
    concur with the advice from BJ and David to create some short samples to
    see what ultimate encoding / transcoding meets your needs.

    Since both Quicktime and Windows Media formats are containers for
    similarly encoded h.264 video and audio codecs, you should expect the
    results for a given video (and audio) bitrate to be roughly equivalent.

    If your intention is to preserve the original content without further
    severe degradation, you could apply a very simple 'rule of thumb' and
    divide the file size by the time duration of the clip to see what the
    original content bitrate is. A 10 megabyte clip which runs for 5
    seconds, for example, would have a bitrate of 2 megabytes per second, or
    16 megabits/sec. This rate becomes your "starting point" as a reference
    to what you initially are dealing with, adding no degradation.

    Depending upon many variables, most notably the distribution media
    format you intend (such as Internet web serving, BluRay disk,
    iPhone/iPod compatible, etc.) you can then begin to degrade the image as
    required, also noting that the content you are compressing varies
    tremendously with regard to how quickly it reveals compression artifacts.

    As others have noted, the degree of image quality degradation can be
    slight for static, slow moving, simple images using the very same
    compression ratio which would utterly destroy fast moving, complex video.

    Thus, a simple table of "correct" values is nearly meaningless, and only
    the most simple generalizations such as the Wiki article I sent earlier
    can be used in a very generic way.

    Taking the actual clip, in particular the most stressing portions, and
    experimenting with bitrates in the format of your intended distribution,
    is the RIGHT WAY to ultimately determine what you should be using. My
    apologies for not amplifying these points in my 1:00 A.M. reply early
    this morning. I was not up for any more elaboration at that time of day
    / night.

    Hope this helps Gary,

    Smarty
     
    Smarty, Apr 30, 2011
    #8
  9. "David Ruether" <> wrote in message
    news:iph292$8h6$...

    > For Gary, I do as "BJ" suggests, and take a *short* clip of high
    > quality and detail (with motion in part of it), and I convert it to
    > whatever I want to try (within the limits of the maximum data
    > rate for the new format, or the lower data rate I want to try out)
    > and return it to the timeline in synch with the original. I may try
    > several different transcodes, each on a new track in synch with
    > the original clip. Once on the timeline, I choose a particularly
    > detailed frame in the original to place the cursor on, which then
    > (using a 1920x1080 LCD monitor for the video) permits me to
    > see the differences when tracks are switched on/off to compare
    > their contents with the original material. It can also be useful to
    > play the tracks (assuming that their formats play smoothly from
    > the timeline - or in the case of Vegas, RAM previews can be
    > made to guarantee smooth playback) to see what the clips
    > look like in motion.
    > --DR


    OK, come on fellers - the reason for my question should be apparent now. I
    am not going to be fooling around with all these experiments every time I
    need to encode something. As I said, I suppose I will have to do the work
    and make my own table, but I am very surprised that someone has not done
    this already. I have been stumbling along so far by trying to trust the
    preset rates, but of course that assumes that it is possible to have the
    programs compute all of the possible preset bitrates that I will need at a
    given moment. Doesn't seem to work out that way, and my ignorance bugs me.

    So hey, let's get together and make a GOOD, USEFUL chart that we can all
    use, and maybe send it to The Videoguys to publish. There are only so many
    commonly encountered situations that we need to address.

    OK, couple more responses below that I haven't yet read. Maybe they have
    done it!

    Gary
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Apr 30, 2011
    #9
  10. <CLicker> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 00:47:15 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>I'm not sure how to say this one without exposing my ignorance
    >>unnecessarily, but I am sometimes without a paddle on bitrates when I am
    >>trying to convert/compress a video into another format. I have several
    >>programs on my computer that can convert video files, and there are so
    >>many
    >>formats and purposes for these conversions that the program cannot always
    >>give you a ballpark number in the presets.
    >>
    >>For example, I have finished editing a Hi Def video, and I want to convert
    >>it to Windows Media File, or Quicktime. I can figure out most everything
    >>except when it asks me what bitrate I want, or it offers me a very low
    >>bitrate in the presets, it hits me cold what a good figure would be. What
    >>I
    >>want is a simple table for most situations with bitrates for upper and
    >>lower
    >>quality limits of the various formats. So it might say, Windows Media
    >>Video,
    >>Hi Def, full frame, you want 2000 to 5000 kbps.
    >>
    >>I realize that I could make my own table after a lot of experimentation,
    >>but
    >>why don't The Videoguys or someone already have such tables? My Premiere
    >>textbooks aren't real helpful either. Perhaps there is a website that lays
    >>this out for me. Anyone know?
    >>
    >>Gary Eickmeier
    >>

    >
    > I've never worked with WMV or QT video but have converted analog and
    > HDTV video captures using either h.263 or h.264 DivX codecs. My
    > intent was merely to reduce file size but with as little sacrifice in
    > quality as possible. At the very least this meant to me that I needed
    > a two pass encoder and a suggested bit range that would accommodate
    > what I perceived to be typical lighting and motion for the shows I was
    > going to convert. However, it was still necessary to tweak the
    > average for those videos which were obviously outside those
    > parameters, namely more motion and/or darker scenes; underwater and
    > gradient coloring, such as sky and painted walls, require another
    > tweak to minimize stair stepping.
    >
    > One early HD effort was a PBS video of the Monterey Aquarium when they
    > first introduced a Great White Shark to their collection. This HDTV
    > show was captured by a Hauppauge analog-to-digital USB box via SVideo
    > from a Motorola HD-DVR and the resulting 13 mbps CBR MPEG2 file was
    > then compressed to 2 mbps VBR. This 50 minute video still shows very
    > well on a 55" HDTV.
    >
    > In the long run, I settled on a typical range of 8000 (for the very
    > dark or fast scenes) to 1000 (for their opposites) with a target size
    > of about 25% of the original. Originally using Flask-MPEG and
    > eventually VDub-MPEG, both with DivX h.263 codecs. The container used
    > was .AVI. The process typically consumed 2.5x playtime on P4 type
    > CPUs.
    >
    > Lately, I've tested DivX's h.264 converter which does superb one pass
    > work at about 4:1 reduction in size but, sadly, takes 5x play time on
    > a 2 GHz quad to produce this result. The PC used has an h.264 decoder
    > in its GPU but is of little use for making h.264 encodings. The
    > container used is .MKV.
    >
    > However, with the capacity and price of HDD dramatically outstripping
    > optical media, I've long ago stopped converting anything from its
    > captured bit rate and quality. With 2 TB drives now below $80 there's
    > little concern should another disc or more be needed for the library.
    > While AVI, MPG, MKV, and TS files (among others) cannot be played
    > without the user needing a codec or piece of hardware to assist, its
    > not been a major hurdle to us. We often take along a few hard drives,
    > an IcyDock single bay transport, and a WD TV Live Plus player to
    > entertain others in their homes or a vacation spot.


    To all - there is a feature on my Premiere encoder that has a window that is
    supposed to show you the material that is input vs. the resulting output
    video. I haven't experimented with that enough to know how accurate it is in
    predicting what the compressed stuff will look like, but if it works it
    would be a godsend to tell me both aspect ratio and video quality of the
    resulting encode. I will make a point of it to try this with various
    settings and see if this is one answer to my question.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Apr 30, 2011
    #10
  11. Gary Eickmeier

    Smarty Guest

    On 4/30/2011 2:02 PM, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
    > <CLicker> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 00:47:15 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> I'm not sure how to say this one without exposing my ignorance
    >>> unnecessarily, but I am sometimes without a paddle on bitrates when I am
    >>> trying to convert/compress a video into another format. I have several
    >>> programs on my computer that can convert video files, and there are so
    >>> many
    >>> formats and purposes for these conversions that the program cannot always
    >>> give you a ballpark number in the presets.
    >>>
    >>> For example, I have finished editing a Hi Def video, and I want to convert
    >>> it to Windows Media File, or Quicktime. I can figure out most everything
    >>> except when it asks me what bitrate I want, or it offers me a very low
    >>> bitrate in the presets, it hits me cold what a good figure would be. What
    >>> I
    >>> want is a simple table for most situations with bitrates for upper and
    >>> lower
    >>> quality limits of the various formats. So it might say, Windows Media
    >>> Video,
    >>> Hi Def, full frame, you want 2000 to 5000 kbps.
    >>>
    >>> I realize that I could make my own table after a lot of experimentation,
    >>> but
    >>> why don't The Videoguys or someone already have such tables? My Premiere
    >>> textbooks aren't real helpful either. Perhaps there is a website that lays
    >>> this out for me. Anyone know?
    >>>
    >>> Gary Eickmeier
    >>>

    >> I've never worked with WMV or QT video but have converted analog and
    >> HDTV video captures using either h.263 or h.264 DivX codecs. My
    >> intent was merely to reduce file size but with as little sacrifice in
    >> quality as possible. At the very least this meant to me that I needed
    >> a two pass encoder and a suggested bit range that would accommodate
    >> what I perceived to be typical lighting and motion for the shows I was
    >> going to convert. However, it was still necessary to tweak the
    >> average for those videos which were obviously outside those
    >> parameters, namely more motion and/or darker scenes; underwater and
    >> gradient coloring, such as sky and painted walls, require another
    >> tweak to minimize stair stepping.
    >>
    >> One early HD effort was a PBS video of the Monterey Aquarium when they
    >> first introduced a Great White Shark to their collection. This HDTV
    >> show was captured by a Hauppauge analog-to-digital USB box via SVideo
    >> from a Motorola HD-DVR and the resulting 13 mbps CBR MPEG2 file was
    >> then compressed to 2 mbps VBR. This 50 minute video still shows very
    >> well on a 55" HDTV.
    >>
    >> In the long run, I settled on a typical range of 8000 (for the very
    >> dark or fast scenes) to 1000 (for their opposites) with a target size
    >> of about 25% of the original. Originally using Flask-MPEG and
    >> eventually VDub-MPEG, both with DivX h.263 codecs. The container used
    >> was .AVI. The process typically consumed 2.5x playtime on P4 type
    >> CPUs.
    >>
    >> Lately, I've tested DivX's h.264 converter which does superb one pass
    >> work at about 4:1 reduction in size but, sadly, takes 5x play time on
    >> a 2 GHz quad to produce this result. The PC used has an h.264 decoder
    >> in its GPU but is of little use for making h.264 encodings. The
    >> container used is .MKV.
    >>
    >> However, with the capacity and price of HDD dramatically outstripping
    >> optical media, I've long ago stopped converting anything from its
    >> captured bit rate and quality. With 2 TB drives now below $80 there's
    >> little concern should another disc or more be needed for the library.
    >> While AVI, MPG, MKV, and TS files (among others) cannot be played
    >> without the user needing a codec or piece of hardware to assist, its
    >> not been a major hurdle to us. We often take along a few hard drives,
    >> an IcyDock single bay transport, and a WD TV Live Plus player to
    >> entertain others in their homes or a vacation spot.

    > To all - there is a feature on my Premiere encoder that has a window that is
    > supposed to show you the material that is input vs. the resulting output
    > video. I haven't experimented with that enough to know how accurate it is in
    > predicting what the compressed stuff will look like, but if it works it
    > would be a godsend to tell me both aspect ratio and video quality of the
    > resulting encode. I will make a point of it to try this with various
    > settings and see if this is one answer to my question.
    >
    > Gary Eickmeier
    >
    >

    To muddy the water slightly Gary, the ultimate compression choice should
    attempt to factor the viewer's environment if at all possible, so the
    process which all of us have recommended is correct but not necessarily
    complete.

    Under the best of circumstances, you should actually view the resulting
    compressed video on the target player. I was, for example, surprised to
    find that video I had compressed to be "artifact-free" when viewed on my
    computer revealed rather obvious flaws when played on my
    grand-daughter's iPad, a smaller and lower resolution device. I
    attribute the flaws to the iPad h.264 decoder, and overcame the problem
    by using a somewhat higher bitrate during subsequent encodes.

    My point in adding this caveat is to caution you that the complexity of
    choosing the "correct" bitrate is regrettably complex, and not amenable
    to a "cookbook" solution in many cases. Erring on the side of higher
    bitrates is often used by people who make their livings as professional
    "compressionists" to avoid surprises and unhappy viewers.
     
    Smarty, Apr 30, 2011
    #11
  12. "Smarty" <> wrote in message
    news:iphk40$fpp$...
    > On 4/30/2011 2:02 PM, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
    >> <CLicker> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 00:47:15 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
    >>> <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I'm not sure how to say this one without exposing my ignorance
    >>>> unnecessarily, but I am sometimes without a paddle on bitrates when I
    >>>> am
    >>>> trying to convert/compress a video into another format. I have several
    >>>> programs on my computer that can convert video files, and there are so
    >>>> many
    >>>> formats and purposes for these conversions that the program cannot
    >>>> always
    >>>> give you a ballpark number in the presets.
    >>>>
    >>>> For example, I have finished editing a Hi Def video, and I want to
    >>>> convert
    >>>> it to Windows Media File, or Quicktime. I can figure out most
    >>>> everything
    >>>> except when it asks me what bitrate I want, or it offers me a very low
    >>>> bitrate in the presets, it hits me cold what a good figure would be.
    >>>> What
    >>>> I
    >>>> want is a simple table for most situations with bitrates for upper and
    >>>> lower
    >>>> quality limits of the various formats. So it might say, Windows Media
    >>>> Video,
    >>>> Hi Def, full frame, you want 2000 to 5000 kbps.
    >>>>
    >>>> I realize that I could make my own table after a lot of
    >>>> experimentation,
    >>>> but
    >>>> why don't The Videoguys or someone already have such tables? My
    >>>> Premiere
    >>>> textbooks aren't real helpful either. Perhaps there is a website that
    >>>> lays
    >>>> this out for me. Anyone know?
    >>>>
    >>>> Gary Eickmeier
    >>>>
    >>> I've never worked with WMV or QT video but have converted analog and
    >>> HDTV video captures using either h.263 or h.264 DivX codecs. My
    >>> intent was merely to reduce file size but with as little sacrifice in
    >>> quality as possible. At the very least this meant to me that I needed
    >>> a two pass encoder and a suggested bit range that would accommodate
    >>> what I perceived to be typical lighting and motion for the shows I was
    >>> going to convert. However, it was still necessary to tweak the
    >>> average for those videos which were obviously outside those
    >>> parameters, namely more motion and/or darker scenes; underwater and
    >>> gradient coloring, such as sky and painted walls, require another
    >>> tweak to minimize stair stepping.
    >>>
    >>> One early HD effort was a PBS video of the Monterey Aquarium when they
    >>> first introduced a Great White Shark to their collection. This HDTV
    >>> show was captured by a Hauppauge analog-to-digital USB box via SVideo
    >>> from a Motorola HD-DVR and the resulting 13 mbps CBR MPEG2 file was
    >>> then compressed to 2 mbps VBR. This 50 minute video still shows very
    >>> well on a 55" HDTV.
    >>>
    >>> In the long run, I settled on a typical range of 8000 (for the very
    >>> dark or fast scenes) to 1000 (for their opposites) with a target size
    >>> of about 25% of the original. Originally using Flask-MPEG and
    >>> eventually VDub-MPEG, both with DivX h.263 codecs. The container used
    >>> was .AVI. The process typically consumed 2.5x playtime on P4 type
    >>> CPUs.
    >>>
    >>> Lately, I've tested DivX's h.264 converter which does superb one pass
    >>> work at about 4:1 reduction in size but, sadly, takes 5x play time on
    >>> a 2 GHz quad to produce this result. The PC used has an h.264 decoder
    >>> in its GPU but is of little use for making h.264 encodings. The
    >>> container used is .MKV.
    >>>
    >>> However, with the capacity and price of HDD dramatically outstripping
    >>> optical media, I've long ago stopped converting anything from its
    >>> captured bit rate and quality. With 2 TB drives now below $80 there's
    >>> little concern should another disc or more be needed for the library.
    >>> While AVI, MPG, MKV, and TS files (among others) cannot be played
    >>> without the user needing a codec or piece of hardware to assist, its
    >>> not been a major hurdle to us. We often take along a few hard drives,
    >>> an IcyDock single bay transport, and a WD TV Live Plus player to
    >>> entertain others in their homes or a vacation spot.

    >> To all - there is a feature on my Premiere encoder that has a window that
    >> is
    >> supposed to show you the material that is input vs. the resulting output
    >> video. I haven't experimented with that enough to know how accurate it is
    >> in
    >> predicting what the compressed stuff will look like, but if it works it
    >> would be a godsend to tell me both aspect ratio and video quality of the
    >> resulting encode. I will make a point of it to try this with various
    >> settings and see if this is one answer to my question.
    >>
    >> Gary Eickmeier
    >>
    >>

    > To muddy the water slightly Gary, the ultimate compression choice should
    > attempt to factor the viewer's environment if at all possible, so the
    > process which all of us have recommended is correct but not necessarily
    > complete.
    >
    > Under the best of circumstances, you should actually view the resulting
    > compressed video on the target player. I was, for example, surprised to
    > find that video I had compressed to be "artifact-free" when viewed on my
    > computer revealed rather obvious flaws when played on my grand-daughter's
    > iPad, a smaller and lower resolution device. I attribute the flaws to the
    > iPad h.264 decoder, and overcame the problem by using a somewhat higher
    > bitrate during subsequent encodes.
    >
    > My point in adding this caveat is to caution you that the complexity of
    > choosing the "correct" bitrate is regrettably complex, and not amenable to
    > a "cookbook" solution in many cases. Erring on the side of higher bitrates
    > is often used by people who make their livings as professional
    > "compressionists" to avoid surprises and unhappy viewers.


    OK, fine, but that again illustrates my point. There certainly would be
    ballpark figures that we could write down as we learn lessons like you have
    just described. What we are after is the fact that we don't want to go so
    LOW that it looks terrible on most players, and we don't want to go so HIGH
    that it uses up unnecessary bandwidth. Sometimes we can stand a smaller than
    fullframe size, which would probably affect the bitrate.

    As you suggest, it is probably more a matter of long experience than a cut
    and dried computation. So let's get together and srart sharing.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Apr 30, 2011
    #12
  13. "Gary Eickmeier" <> wrote in message
    news:HL%up.23901$...
    > "Smarty" <> wrote in message
    > news:iphk40$fpp$...


    >> To muddy the water slightly Gary, the ultimate compression choice should
    >> attempt to factor the viewer's environment if at all possible, so the
    >> process which all of us have recommended is correct but not necessarily
    >> complete.
    >>
    >> Under the best of circumstances, you should actually view the resulting
    >> compressed video on the target player. I was, for example, surprised to
    >> find that video I had compressed to be "artifact-free" when viewed on my
    >> computer revealed rather obvious flaws when played on my grand-daughter's
    >> iPad, a smaller and lower resolution device. I attribute the flaws to the
    >> iPad h.264 decoder, and overcame the problem by using a somewhat higher
    >> bitrate during subsequent encodes.
    >>
    >> My point in adding this caveat is to caution you that the complexity of
    >> choosing the "correct" bitrate is regrettably complex, and not amenable
    >> to a "cookbook" solution in many cases. Erring on the side of higher
    >> bitrates is often used by people who make their livings as professional
    >> "compressionists" to avoid surprises and unhappy viewers.


    > OK, fine, but that again illustrates my point. There certainly would be
    > ballpark figures that we could write down as we learn lessons like you
    > have just described. What we are after is the fact that we don't want to
    > go so LOW that it looks terrible on most players, and we don't want to go
    > so HIGH that it uses up unnecessary bandwidth. Sometimes we can stand a
    > smaller than fullframe size, which would probably affect the bitrate.
    >
    > As you suggest, it is probably more a matter of long experience than a cut
    > and dried computation. So let's get together and srart sharing.
    >
    > Gary Eickmeier


    OK, as an example I was surprised to find how "off" my sharpening
    was when I went from half-sized video monitoring to full 1920x1080
    monitoring. Doing this also permitted me to make more accurate
    judgements about how good various file transcodes and data rates
    were compared with the original material. So, for 1920x1080-60p
    28 Mbps VBR material from the Panasonic TM700 camcorder,
    it appears to me that a 1920x1080-60p 50 Mbps CBR MP4 file
    can retain all the detail of the original (but possibly with some data
    rate to spare - but I will use this for archiving my edited video...;-),
    but that a Blu-ray disc, even one of 60i 40 Mbps, cannot, due to its
    interlacing. BTW, I think "Smarty" has covered the issues well,
    and shows why there can be no "set in stone" (or even very good)
    guide for what you are looking for, alas.
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, May 1, 2011
    #13
  14. "David Ruether" <> wrote in message
    news:ipi9tn$6h8$...

    > OK, as an example I was surprised to find how "off" my sharpening
    > was when I went from half-sized video monitoring to full 1920x1080
    > monitoring. Doing this also permitted me to make more accurate
    > judgements about how good various file transcodes and data rates
    > were compared with the original material. So, for 1920x1080-60p
    > 28 Mbps VBR material from the Panasonic TM700 camcorder,
    > it appears to me that a 1920x1080-60p 50 Mbps CBR MP4 file
    > can retain all the detail of the original (but possibly with some data
    > rate to spare - but I will use this for archiving my edited video...;-),
    > but that a Blu-ray disc, even one of 60i 40 Mbps, cannot, due to its
    > interlacing. BTW, I think "Smarty" has covered the issues well,
    > and shows why there can be no "set in stone" (or even very good)
    > guide for what you are looking for, alas.
    > --DR


    You guys know I didn't say set in stone, I said ballpark.

    If you want a great example of the need for a proper monitor for your
    editing, try doing a screen capture project sometime. I had to show the
    computer screen on NTSC video as the client went through his web site and
    explained how to use it. I figured the "pro" way to handle this would be a
    screen capture program that can actually record what you are doing on your
    computer monitor in realtime in an AVI format. Tried it on my computer a few
    times, and it worked! Sharp as hell! Every mouse movement and keystroke!

    While editing, it looked fine on my monitor in the editing program. Then I
    put it up on the video monitor screen to check the final output. Whoops. In
    trying to translate between systems, the scan lines and frame rates just do
    not track with each other, and it was a mess. What I ended up doing was just
    shooting the computer screen with my video camera. I didn't think that would
    work, because in the past I have seen the sync bars roll, but in this case
    it did work. No flicker, no sync roll, fine resolution, and I could zoom in
    on the screen to show a particular part. That footage looked good on both
    the edit screen and the video monitor, because it was shot with the camera
    and not converted from computer scan output.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, May 1, 2011
    #14
  15. Gary Eickmeier

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <_n4vp.109211$>,
    says...
    >
    > "David Ruether" <> wrote in message
    > news:ipi9tn$6h8$...
    >
    > > OK, as an example I was surprised to find how "off" my sharpening
    > > was when I went from half-sized video monitoring to full 1920x1080
    > > monitoring. Doing this also permitted me to make more accurate
    > > judgements about how good various file transcodes and data rates
    > > were compared with the original material. So, for 1920x1080-60p
    > > 28 Mbps VBR material from the Panasonic TM700 camcorder,
    > > it appears to me that a 1920x1080-60p 50 Mbps CBR MP4 file
    > > can retain all the detail of the original (but possibly with some data
    > > rate to spare - but I will use this for archiving my edited video...;-),
    > > but that a Blu-ray disc, even one of 60i 40 Mbps, cannot, due to its
    > > interlacing. BTW, I think "Smarty" has covered the issues well,
    > > and shows why there can be no "set in stone" (or even very good)
    > > guide for what you are looking for, alas.
    > > --DR

    >
    > You guys know I didn't say set in stone, I said ballpark.
    >
    > If you want a great example of the need for a proper monitor for your
    > editing, try doing a screen capture project sometime. I had to show the
    > computer screen on NTSC video as the client went through his web site and
    > explained how to use it. I figured the "pro" way to handle this would be a
    > screen capture program that can actually record what you are doing on your
    > computer monitor in realtime in an AVI format. Tried it on my computer a few
    > times, and it worked! Sharp as hell! Every mouse movement and keystroke!
    >
    > While editing, it looked fine on my monitor in the editing program. Then I
    > put it up on the video monitor screen to check the final output. Whoops. In
    > trying to translate between systems, the scan lines and frame rates just do
    > not track with each other, and it was a mess. What I ended up doing was just
    > shooting the computer screen with my video camera. I didn't think that would
    > work, because in the past I have seen the sync bars roll, but in this case
    > it did work. No flicker, no sync roll, fine resolution, and I could zoom in
    > on the screen to show a particular part. That footage looked good on both
    > the edit screen and the video monitor, because it was shot with the camera
    > and not converted from computer scan output.


    I'm curious--were you using an LCD monitor or a CRT?

    The reason I ask is that a (long) while back I was involved with a
    similar project and we found that shooting a CRT just plain didn't work
    (at least not with the cameras and monitors that we had on hand at the
    time) but the one LCD we had on hand worked fine.
    >
    > Gary Eickmeier
     
    J. Clarke, May 1, 2011
    #15
  16. "Gary Eickmeier" <> wrote in message
    news:_n4vp.109211$...
    > "David Ruether" <> wrote in message
    > news:ipi9tn$6h8$...


    [...]
    >> BTW, I think "Smarty" has covered the issues well,
    >> and shows why there can be no "set in stone" (or even very good) guide
    >> for what you are looking for, alas.
    >> --DR


    > You guys know I didn't say set in stone, I said ballpark.

    [...]
    > Gary Eickmeier


    Well, OK (not that I'm into baseball, but...;-), "ballpark"
    figures for data rates range from less than 1 Mbps in the
    bleachers to more than 300 Mbps at home-plate...8^)
    This should be as useful as giving specific recommendations
    for unknown video conditions...;-) Sorry! 8^), 8^), 8^)
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, May 1, 2011
    #16
  17. Gary Eickmeier

    Smarty Guest

    On 5/1/2011 9:08 AM, David Ruether wrote:
    > "Gary Eickmeier"<> wrote in message
    > news:_n4vp.109211$...
    >> "David Ruether"<> wrote in message
    >> news:ipi9tn$6h8$...

    > [...]
    >>> BTW, I think "Smarty" has covered the issues well,
    >>> and shows why there can be no "set in stone" (or even very good) guide
    >>> for what you are looking for, alas.
    >>> --DR

    >> You guys know I didn't say set in stone, I said ballpark.

    > [...]
    >> Gary Eickmeier

    > Well, OK (not that I'm into baseball, but...;-), "ballpark"
    > figures for data rates range from less than 1 Mbps in the
    > bleachers to more than 300 Mbps at home-plate...8^)
    > This should be as useful as giving specific recommendations
    > for unknown video conditions...;-) Sorry! 8^), 8^), 8^)
    > --DR
    >
    >

    Gary,
    David really is correct since your expectation for a 'cookbook' style
    table of bitrates ignores the artistic nature of the choice, and the
    myriad of variables. Even if the various permutations were summarized to
    a table, they would, at, best, become a starting point for your own
    experimentation. It is true that there are "ballpark" estimates such as
    found in Fuinal Cut Pro templates and elsewhere which will stipulate:

    "512Kbps 640 by 480 for web streaming" but only you can judge what level
    of quality / bitrate actually works well for your specific content and
    your specific target hardware.

    You COULD download a variety of clips in the media format you and your
    clients most commonly use, and look at their bitrates (size in MB
    divided by clip duration in seconds) to form your own basis of
    reference. YouTube, Vimio, and many other sources can get you started.

    You will also note that there is a 'plateau' in mpeg encoding generally,
    where the improvements become comparatively smaller for continued
    increases in bitrates. Thus, the leap from 5 to 15 Mbits/sec will, in
    general, look much more apparent than the same sized leap from 15 to 25
    Mbits/sec.
     
    Smarty, May 1, 2011
    #17
  18. "Smarty" <> wrote in message
    news:ipjnv6$3vp$...
    > On 5/1/2011 9:08 AM, David Ruether wrote:
    >> "Gary Eickmeier"<> wrote in message
    >> news:_n4vp.109211$...
    >>> "David Ruether"<> wrote in message
    >>> news:ipi9tn$6h8$...

    >> [...]
    >>>> BTW, I think "Smarty" has covered the issues well,
    >>>> and shows why there can be no "set in stone" (or even very good) guide
    >>>> for what you are looking for, alas.
    >>>> --DR
    >>> You guys know I didn't say set in stone, I said ballpark.

    >> [...]
    >>> Gary Eickmeier

    >> Well, OK (not that I'm into baseball, but...;-), "ballpark"
    >> figures for data rates range from less than 1 Mbps in the
    >> bleachers to more than 300 Mbps at home-plate...8^)
    >> This should be as useful as giving specific recommendations
    >> for unknown video conditions...;-) Sorry! 8^), 8^), 8^)
    >> --DR
    >>
    >>

    > Gary,
    > David really is correct since your expectation for a 'cookbook' style
    > table of bitrates ignores the artistic nature of the choice, and the
    > myriad of variables. Even if the various permutations were summarized to a
    > table, they would, at, best, become a starting point for your own
    > experimentation. It is true that there are "ballpark" estimates such as
    > found in Fuinal Cut Pro templates and elsewhere which will stipulate:
    >
    > "512Kbps 640 by 480 for web streaming" but only you can judge what level
    > of quality / bitrate actually works well for your specific content and
    > your specific target hardware.
    >
    > You COULD download a variety of clips in the media format you and your
    > clients most commonly use, and look at their bitrates (size in MB divided
    > by clip duration in seconds) to form your own basis of reference. YouTube,
    > Vimio, and many other sources can get you started.
    >
    > You will also note that there is a 'plateau' in mpeg encoding generally,
    > where the improvements become comparatively smaller for continued
    > increases in bitrates. Thus, the leap from 5 to 15 Mbits/sec will, in
    > general, look much more apparent than the same sized leap from 15 to 25
    > Mbits/sec.


    OK, I'll stop asking about this one for now and start doing a few
    experiments for my own benefit and amusement. If I learn something useful, I
    will share it.

    At least I got you two to agree on something.

    Gary
     
    Gary Eickmeier, May 1, 2011
    #18
  19. "Gary Eickmeier" <> wrote in message
    news:Gugvp.14777$...
    > "Smarty" <> wrote in message
    > news:ipjnv6$3vp$...
    >> On 5/1/2011 9:08 AM, David Ruether wrote:
    >>> "Gary Eickmeier"<> wrote in message
    >>> news:_n4vp.109211$...
    >>>> "David Ruether"<> wrote in message
    >>>> news:ipi9tn$6h8$...


    >>> [...]
    >>>>> BTW, I think "Smarty" has covered the issues well,
    >>>>> and shows why there can be no "set in stone" (or even very good) guide
    >>>>> for what you are looking for, alas.
    >>>>> --DR


    >>>> You guys know I didn't say set in stone, I said ballpark.
    >>> [...]
    >>>> Gary Eickmeier


    >>> Well, OK (not that I'm into baseball, but...;-), "ballpark"
    >>> figures for data rates range from less than 1 Mbps in the
    >>> bleachers to more than 300 Mbps at home-plate...8^)
    >>> This should be as useful as giving specific recommendations
    >>> for unknown video conditions...;-) Sorry! 8^), 8^), 8^)
    >>> --DR


    >> Gary,
    >> David really is correct since your expectation for a 'cookbook' style
    >> table of bitrates ignores the artistic nature of the choice, and the
    >> myriad of variables. Even if the various permutations were summarized to
    >> a table, they would, at, best, become a starting point for your own
    >> experimentation. It is true that there are "ballpark" estimates such as
    >> found in Fuinal Cut Pro templates and elsewhere which will stipulate:
    >>
    >> "512Kbps 640 by 480 for web streaming" but only you can judge what level
    >> of quality / bitrate actually works well for your specific content and
    >> your specific target hardware.
    >>
    >> You COULD download a variety of clips in the media format you and your
    >> clients most commonly use, and look at their bitrates (size in MB divided
    >> by clip duration in seconds) to form your own basis of reference.
    >> YouTube, Vimio, and many other sources can get you started.
    >>
    >> You will also note that there is a 'plateau' in mpeg encoding generally,
    >> where the improvements become comparatively smaller for continued
    >> increases in bitrates. Thus, the leap from 5 to 15 Mbits/sec will, in
    >> general, look much more apparent than the same sized leap from 15 to 25
    >> Mbits/sec.


    > OK, I'll stop asking about this one for now and start doing a few
    > experiments for my own benefit and amusement. If I learn something useful,
    > I will share it.
    >
    > At least I got you two to agree on something.
    >
    > Gary


    8^), 8^), 8^)
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, May 1, 2011
    #19
  20. "David Ruether" <> wrote in message
    news:ipkjt4$ld7$...
    >
    > "Gary Eickmeier" <> wrote in message
    > news:Gugvp.14777$...


    >> At least I got you two to agree on something.
    >>
    >> Gary

    >
    > 8^), 8^), 8^)
    > --DR


    Eight Up David!

    Gary
     
    Gary Eickmeier, May 2, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Click

    Are Bitrates & file size directly proportional?

    Click, Aug 30, 2003, in forum: Amateur Video Production
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    351
    Mike T
    Aug 30, 2003
  2. Tony

    Bitrates, some minor clarifaction needed

    Tony, Sep 13, 2003, in forum: Amateur Video Production
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    274
    Sasha
    Sep 15, 2003
  3. yeltz

    MPEG2 encoding at high bitrates: CCE vs ProCoder

    yeltz, Jun 20, 2005, in forum: Amateur Video Production
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    360
    yeltz
    Jul 6, 2005
  4. Dimitri P.

    lossless bitrates

    Dimitri P., Jul 11, 2006, in forum: Amateur Video Production
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    779
    Ken Maltby
    Jul 12, 2006
  5. AC3, 5.1 surround at lower bitrates?

    , Sep 12, 2006, in forum: Amateur Video Production
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    397
    Netmask
    Sep 12, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page