View Full Version : Best DV Compression Software ?
Thistlebop
11-03-2004, 02:07 PM
Sorry to bother everyone, but I'd love to get as many opinions on which Compression software works the best for compressing "Avi's" for web viewing.
--Bop
Hoping with anticipation that some of the guru's will chime in. ;D
krestofre
11-03-2004, 02:48 PM
If you've got money to spare Sorenson Squeeze 4 is great. If you're on a budget then jump over to www.doom9.org. They've got tons of guides for video compression and most of it uses open source or free software.
On a side note, I wouldn't use AVI for web compression. I'd look at Windows Media, Quicktime, or Shockwave Flash.
Hope that helps.
Chris
HansK
11-03-2004, 03:32 PM
Cleaner is a great product:
peecee http://www4.discreet.com/cleanerxl/
mac http://www.discreet.com/products/cleaner/cleaner6/
Supports creating most formats.
Thistlebop
11-03-2004, 06:23 PM
If you've got money to spare Sorenson Squeeze 4 is great. If you're on a budget then jump over to www.doom9.org. They've got tons of guides for video compression and most of it uses open source or free software.
On a side note, I wouldn't use AVI for web compression. I'd look at Windows Media, Quicktime, or Shockwave Flash.
Hope that helps.
Chris
Actually I ment that my original clips were "Avi's". Do I need to change them to another format before converting them for WM, QT or Flash ? And outta the three... which one is most widely used around here ?
--Bop
Shadow
11-03-2004, 06:34 PM
I will say, Certainly Quicktime is the most used.
Yea, I like Quicktime. WM is my other favorite. I am forever flopping between the two.
HansK
11-03-2004, 11:45 PM
original clips were "Avi's". Do I need to change them to another format before converting them for WM, QT or Flash?
No, you should be able to convert directly from the AVI. But, an AVI can be compressed or uncompressed. Normally AVIs created through captures are created uncompressed.
As for the popular format around here, that would be Quicktime (mov) and then Win Media Player (wmv). Creating one of each will generally cover everyone and keep people happy :)
Guest
11-04-2004, 12:33 PM
Try this free encoder out - it now takes avi's(and avs scripts)
QuEnc (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=b07d16e972a923ae298157cc2a2ee3c1& threadid=84857)
Have fun,
Tin2tin
Thistlebop
11-04-2004, 06:01 PM
I've been practicing some with Sorensen's Squeeze. The problem that I'm having is that I can't seem to keep the size and quality that I want without the file still being a Gross 10 Megs >:(
I want to get it down to 3 megs or less so that people will take the time to download it and view it. But when I get it down to that size, the images are the size of a postage stamp (slight exageration, but you get the point).
Arrrrgh >:(
--Bop
krestofre
11-05-2004, 07:07 AM
How long of a video are your trying to compress? Depending on that answer you may be asking the impossible. Also, which of the three formats that we've discussed are you using as output?
A 10 MB file is not all that bad this day and age. The new Star Wars trailer was 10 MB. Not that it has a lot to do with this discussion, but I thought I'd mention it. ;D
Chris
Shadow
11-05-2004, 08:29 AM
I agree with Krestofre, we are not in the age of carbon computer, 10 MB file today is not that much.
TuffGong
11-05-2004, 06:42 PM
I average about 2MB per minute on a 320X240 video clip. This gives me adequate quality / file size.
thejessicastar1
11-18-2004, 01:59 PM
On this subject, I'm trying to export a 15 min. project for the web using compressor (to mpeg-4) and my file is about 65 megs, but it's only 320x240 size and I still see some digital noise on some parts (the dvd version is beautiful and clean). I watched "Roadside Attractions" in the Screen grabs/clips area and his clip was 16:9 size, large and clean. Yet it took about the same amt. of time to download as mine (about 5 or 6 mins. on dsl/cable). Am I missing something? Can I make mine larger and cleaner while producing a smaller file?
Any help would be appreciated
Nathan
thejessicastar1
11-18-2004, 03:36 PM
Just checked the "Roadside Attractions" site again and I was wrong. His medium size one is actually smaller than mine, so I figure the larger one (which isn't available b/c of bandwith limits) is probably about the same size. I also checked another one that I had on my mind when I wrote the last post and realized that he had just re-sized it to 720x320, that's why it was so wide.
Nathan