Some Feedback Wanted

[Collective Foal]

I like the WMV format and would keep it where it is. It's iPhone accessible, just through YouTube, which shouldn't be a big deal to an iPhone user. WMV is universal and will give you the least problems.

 

As far as a microphone is concerned, I would go with something by Logitech or, if you have the money, Turtle Beach. Headsets usually have good mics to them. There was a $30-$40 Logitech headset I bought at Radioshack. If they still carry it, it's a pretty damn good headset for the price it's at.

[illumilore]

I agree with e-t172: choose non-proprietary formats such as mkv or mp4. I would even choose webm over h.264 for the high quality video that he was talking about, as it is more open (and royalty free).

[Clay]

My personal preference for video format is for WMV. It's easier to queue up several FM/CP videos and watch them at once. And I'm more comfortable with Windows Media Player anyway.

[AtomicSymphonic]

Alright, I had to create an account because I wanted my voice to be heard on this.

 

PLEASE use something other than WMV. I have a Mac (and as far as my household goes, I don't have access to a PC) and I would love to have either MP4 or MKV, if that works on Mac *natively*. If not, then please consider posting MP4 from now on!

 

I could not get VLC running on my Mac, even after consulting forums and how-to manuals. VLC is not an option...

 

WMV runs okay on Mac, thanks to a nice, free plug-in called "Flip4Mac", but basically the Mac is a walled garden to every extent. MP3, MP4, AAC, and Apple Lossless ONLY. :-/

 

As a matter of fact, I've been getting increasingly frustrated with how hobbled I am on Mac and am considering a high-end Sony Vaio Laptop to replace my 15" MBP after 6+ years on Mac.

[rridgway]

Personally, either keeping it WMV or changing it to MP4 would be the best. As it stands, I convert the WMV into a MP4 for iTunes without issue.

 

The microphone also doesn't seem to have any problems, maybe on some high frequencies and loud noises problems are audible, but it still is good.

[the_marshmallow_man]

My problem is that, although I'm hardly a tech-o-phobe, and I'm decntly computer literate (well, as much as a casual user can be), I have no idea about the various codec things. WMV works with windows media player and it works with my htc phone, without me having to download players, or anything like that. So I would ask that you either keep it as WMV, or pick something with the same amount of compatibility... whatever that would be.

[rridgway]

My problem is that, although I'm hardly a tech-o-phobe, and I'm decntly computer literate (well, as much as a casual user can be), I have no idea about the various codec things. WMV works with windows media player and it works with my htc phone, without me having to download players, or anything like that. So I would ask that you either keep it as WMV, or pick something with the same amount of compatibility... whatever that would be.

 

That would most likely be MP4, for use in iTunes.

[e-t172]

I became proficient at Xvid encoding since at the time (early 00s) it was THE format for maximum quality for the space. That's changed however and I'm kind of lost as to what's the best way to distribute now.

 

Well, it's not complicated: H.264 has replaced Xvid as leader of video formats. It is used by everyone, including Apple, pirates and media industries. It's the best in terms of quality and support. If you want to encode H.264, x264 is widely considered to be the best encoder in the world.

 

I think releasing all CP episodes in 1080p would be awesome though.

This isn't going to happen unless breakthroughs are made on the Source engine for reasons that are a bit complicated to explain here.

 

I'm interested. Can you elaborate?

 

AVI and WMV are containers that are, quite frankly, outdated these days.

WMV is an awful format to work in, I agree. As for AVI, I would need software that can replace the functionality of Virtualdub + AVIsynth before I could move to another format completely. All my backups of the videos in AVI and will probably remain that way for a while.

 

AVIsynth is not limited to AVI; it can open any format through DirectShowSource provided you have the right DirectShow filters installed (just install LAV Filters and ffdshow and be done with it). It seems VirtualDub supports DirectShow too, so this also applies for this software.

 

Well I am looking for someone that is prepared to handle the differences in content. For example, "Civil Protection: Friday" compresses at a fantastic rate. Lots of still shots and not much motion. The "Diary of a Zombie" video compresses HORRENDOUSLY due to all the fast motion, pronounced details, no motion blur, constantly changing view, etc. For that reason I am interested in quality-based encoding unless someone wants to manually tweak the numbers for each video rather than a standard size limit.

 

Actually, it's very easy to encode with constant quality with x264 using the --crf parameter. In fact it's even easier than specifying a bitrate, since you only have to do one pass. Of course the downside is that you don't control the size of the file: you can get guaranteed quality or guaranteed size, but obviously not both. File size will increase with quality (quality is specified as a number after --crf), and will decrease with encoding time (the slower the encode, the smaller the file for the same quality).

 

So, if you really want quality-based encoding, you (or your encoding guru) should play with crf and decide which quality level you want after visual comparison. Of course, you should expect hard-to-compress files to get quite large, but I'm assuming that's what you want.

 

It has a XLR connector, so you should probably buy an external professional sound card to connect it, for example the M-Audio FastTrack which is quite good (there are probably cheaper alternatives, but I don't know about their quality).

I was planning on getting a different soundcard (probably an Asus Xonar) since Creative has pissed me off too much with their driver support and possibly an accompanying headphone amp, I'm wondering how much quality loss there would be for conversion to a regular headphone jack. I'm not aiming for ultra-professional, just halfway decent.

 

Well, you're in luck: besides having a XLR microphone input, the FastTrack also has a headphone amp and a high quality stereo output! In fact, I personally own a FastTrack and use it mostly with my headphones. So you'll be hitting two birds with one stone. Also, it's external, which has its benefits too. The only thing it doesn't have is multichannel (5.1) output, I don't know if that's a problem for you.

 

x264 + AAC (nero codec only, otherwise stick with lame mp3's) in either MKV (scene/o.s. choice) or MP4 (commercial choice) containers has the best compression vs quality, but can be a headache to create and support. Many of the settings in the x264 alone can on the one hand make the real difference in it's quality, but on the other break the video for many (usually portable) players.

 

That's why he's asking for an "encoding guru". Someone who knows what he's doing won't do this kind of mistakes.

 

XviD + MP3 in AVI is the middle ground.

 

I don't understand how anyone would suggest XviD and MP3 in 2011. You do realize that even Youtube has better quality than this, right?

 

That mic problem you have is really a dynamic range problem. You need good equipment to be able to record high dynamic range without noise or distortion/clipping, definitely more than just a new microphone. I think e-t's option is probably the only way to go, and might not even cut it. Adding a microphone pre-amp is probably also no luxury.

 

The FastTrack has an integrated microphone pre-amp.

 

I agree about the dynamic range problem. Voice already has high dynamic range even when speaking normally. If you begin to shout, the dynamic range gets so high that it quickly becomes difficult to avoid both clipping and background noise.

 

Only thing I can really say as a piece of advice: Don't limit yourself to H.264 compression, there is a surprising number of devices (portable and not) that will fry themselves when presented with having to decode it.

 

H.264 is the most supported format out there. It's used by Blu-ray, European HDTV, Apple, Youtube, pirates… if, in 2011, someone distributes a video player incapable of playing H.264, that man should be shot. Period.

 

WMV is universal

 

Sigh…

 

I would even choose webm over h.264 for the high quality video that he was talking about, as it is more open (and royalty free).

 

If only WebM had the same quality and support as H.264…

[FreakyDude]

Hey everybody, STOP. Why ask Ross to change his video format? Just convert the videos when you download them. You can convert them with any audio converter for free (http://www.any-video-converter.com/products/for_video_free/). Ross, don't bother yourself, let them do it

[e-t172]

Why ask Ross to change his video format?

 

Because WMV is obsolete? Because most players (most notably portable players) are having trouble with it? Because any converter you might use can't do anything about the low quality of the original file? Because you can't reasonably expect people to bother converting between formats (which is a long and painful process when dealing with high-quality video) each time they want to watch a 8-minute episode of Freeman's mind? Because there are people out there (like me) who actually care about having high-quality masters of Ross's videos?

[Indenial]

That's why he's asking for an "encoding guru". Someone who knows what he's doing won't do this kind of mistakes.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about mistakes or not. It's a matter of a choice of quality vs compatibility and support. x264 the only codec of the 3 that has this problem. Both XviD and WMV are pretty much a yes or no deal with players, that is not the case with x264 (yet). For example, one video could work on a player, while another, same formats, same encoder even, but slightly different settings, could not. The thing with this is that people/users don't understand this, and will knock on Ross's door if their player breaks. WMV doesn't have this, like Ross said.

 

I don't understand how anyone would suggest XviD and MP3 in 2011. You do realize that even Youtube has better quality than this, right?

 

You'd be surprised. Actually, nero AAC is the only encoder that manages to beat LAME MP3 in a quality vs bitrate. FAAC still loses this for example. Also, in the most recent test I saw, XviD came in 3rd place in video quality. Nr1 was (unsurprisingly) x264 and the second place was some commercial H.264 codec, but XviD isn't that bad. Don't underestimate years of optimization.

 

Anyway, that's not the reason why I mention it. Using new technology for the sake of having the best and the latest is a good reason for those that can use it, but I'm thinking about compatibility too. Not everyone has the latest gadgets, or buys them on a regular basis. I can even play xvid on my old HD mediaplayer which I still use, or even my old PDA if I wanted to. There's not much that can't play it, and that's something you have to keep in mind too.

 

Besides, look around, XVID-MP3-AVI is still the most released format even today, so it's a very reasonable option. It begin old is not an argument against it.

 

The FastTrack has an integrated microphone pre-amp.

 

Yes, I just checked it out. That's a real nice piece of equipment. I also noticed the mic you mentioned is available with an USB adapter (x2u) which also has a pre-amp integrated: http://www.shure.com/americas/products/accessories/microphone-accessories/problem-solvers/x2u-xlr-to-usb-signal-adapter They even managed to put 48v phantom power in that thing, not that it's needed, but really cool nonetheless. I feel like buying one myself if I knew a way to justify it.

[e-t172]

The FastTrack has an integrated microphone pre-amp.

 

Yes, I just checked it out. That's a real nice piece of equipment. I also noticed the mic you mentioned is available with an USB adapter (x2u) which also has a pre-amp integrated: http://www.shure.com/americas/products/accessories/microphone-accessories/problem-solvers/x2u-xlr-to-usb-signal-adapter They even managed to put 48v phantom power in that thing, not that it's needed, but really cool nonetheless. I feel like buying one myself if I knew a way to justify it.

 

Very interesting indeed. Too bad it's quite expansive compared to the FastTrack, which costs a little more but has more features (like an audio output) compared to the X2u. The X2u probably has better electronics, but I'm not sure that's justified for Ross.

[Indenial]

Too bad it's quite expansive compared to the FastTrack

 

Oh, lol, didn't check that actually, kinda assumed it would be cheaper. That price is crazy, $100 for an usb adapter.

[unknownfrost]

Wow...just wow. This is why I love you Ross (in a bro kinda way...nothin weird lol.) This could potentially mean more work on your end, and yet you don't care. You care about us! <3

 

Now...as for video formats, I personally dont care (I use VLC...everyone should use it IMO), but I think maybe mp4 would be the way to go. I mean it's compatible with most of the common players, and thus would suit most of our needs.

 

Thats really the only input I have. If anything seems weird, I blame it on the lack of sleep (I just got off a 10 hr shift overnight and Im still getting used to it.)

[e-t172]

I use VLC...everyone who don't care about quality should use it IMO

 

Fixed.

[doom44]

Keep WMV please.

[KBcool]

Video Formats: I would say MP4, but I can see how WMV would be best considering the amount of windows users out there. I usually convert the videos to MP4 anyway. (I'm just crazy about things like that, all videos must be MP4!!) If possible keep WMV and also release in MP4. Thats my suggestion.

[Ross Scott]

Well after reading this I'm leaning towards releasing in 2 formats, MAYBE 3.

 

1. something at a lower resolution for iphone / Mac people in a format they like or else something highly compatible

 

2. A higher quality format, probably with h.264, likely with MKV or MP4

 

3. (maybe) Something lower quality that's extremely compatible, like continuing WMV encoding, similar to what's been released so

 

 

I don't understand how anyone would suggest XviD and MP3 in 2011. You do realize that even Youtube has better quality than this, right?

This I really have to call out. For the same bitrate, this is probably true, but I haven't seen ANY Youtube video that looks better than an Xvid encoding on maximum quality settings. I wouldn't mind seeing some codec shootouts comparisons if you have some links. Besides needing a format to distribute to users, I'd also like a format that is still extremely high quality that isn't psychotically demanding in terms of space for my own backups. So a lossy format, but not easily distinguishable from lossless.

 

Hey everybody, STOP. Why ask Ross to change his video format? Just convert the videos when you download them.

The videos I have backed up are higher quality than anything released so far; you'll want these new copies, they'll look better than the WMV ones to date.

 

Keep WMV please.

This is a possibility for lower quality copies, but I'm afraid it may disappear. There's not much I like about the format outside of its compatibility.

 

 

e-t172: email me if you haven't already (I have about 20 related to this post I haven't gone through yet). You've impressed me a lot with your mention of black/white levels (an issue I've dealt with personally), releasing the shortcomings of VLC player, and generally being on the same page as me for the high quality copies. My viewerbase is large enough now that I'm less concerned about everyone being able to play the videos without some help (since there's always Youtube), and I'm more interested in creating some of the best copies possible in a format that's relatively future-proof.

[danielsangeo]

I would like to point out that Windows users can play MP4s easily and it's my preferred format as a Windows user myself. However, I'm not going to be helpful at all and state that whatever format y'all settle upon, I will be happy. I just prefer MP4 myself.

[fllthdcrb]

Well, for container, I would say either MP4 or MKV. One nice thing about both of these formats is they allow for multiple tracks (i.e. alternative video, audio, and subtitle streams). For your videos, this means you could stuff all available subtitles into the container so people don't have to go download them, and the size cost is negligible. Now, obviously you don't have any subtitles available when you first publish an episode, but there's always the possibility of reuploading occasionally with additional subtitle tracks. No re-encoding is necessary; you just remux and add the new tracks.

 

For video format, unquestionably H.264. Best compression for given quality.

 

For audio format... well, Vorbis is probably the best lossy format available in a technical sense (and has no known patent encumberment, which is nice). But it's not universally supported, so I guess AAC.