.wmv and H.264

Roger Shealy · May 30th, 2009, 05:48 AM

.....and here is the rendering setting (my attachment failed in the post above). It's difficult to know exactly how all these variable should be set to be "comparable". I could slide the .wmv slider to "sharper", but then in video it may make the motion more jumpy. Certainly you have to look at the whole effect, including how the video presents itself on the display medium one selects to show their work.

Wacharapong Chiowanich · May 31st, 2009, 10:13 PM

My guess (could be wrong) is the sliding scale of "Video Smoothness" may be related somewhat to the level of bit rates used to encode the source video. In your case, the sharpest or the right edge of the scale could mean best quality but at the expense of highest bit rates. On the other hand, the smoothest or the left edge of the scale could mean the lowest bit rates that would allow the output to play more smoothly on lesser computer systems but at the expense of lower quality video.

I agree different computer systems are not equal in terms of dealing with a particular encoder/NLE or codec. There are just too many factors involved to say which one is better that the others. IMHO, though, if you are already comfortable with any computer system and NLE, you could probably say one codec is more suitable than the others once you take into account similar bit rate sizes and similar processing times as in your tests.

Wacharapong

Malcolm Hamilton · June 9th, 2009, 03:00 PM

Hi there,

I'll add to the wmv vs. H.264 discussion by saying — and until yesterday I thought I was the only person to experience this oddity, but now I'm told that it's not uncommon if you're using a Mac — that files I compress to wmv are useless, because the audio falls out of sync.

I have a MacBook Pro, 4GB RAM, recent versions of QuickTime and Flip4Mac... what else... I've purchased Squeeze and Episode (yes, I've spent hundreds of dollars trying to solve this problem, not to mention the hours I've spent on the phone to tech help at both Sorenson and Telestream), and tried every permutation and combination of data rates and whatever else, and yes, I've tried MPEG Streamclip and Visual Hub too... and nothing has worked.

So — and if I'm wrong to do this, please tell me why — I blame the wmv format, on the Mac side of things anyway.
The advice I'm now getting is to purchase VMWare Fusion, and run Squeeze or Episode or some other encoder in Windows XP. I plan to do this, but only because I have a client who insists on wmv (and not H.264, unfortunately).
Regards, Malcolm

Roger Shealy · June 9th, 2009, 06:19 PM

Malcolm,

No doubt each platform makes its own format easy. When I render to .wmv using Vegas 8's on my PC, it removes interlacing automatically from 60i when render to 24P or 30P and the sound works great. When I use .mp4, I get interlacing. I'm sure I can get rid of it, but it's just one more thing I have to figure out.

Malcolm Hamilton · June 9th, 2009, 07:52 PM

It is frustrating, isn't it. The chap who (on another forum) said the problem was systemic to Macs knows a lot more than I do, so I was relieved to hear him say it wasn't just me. And yet I still have the sneaking suspicion that there are Mac users who encode to wmv perfectly well, with audio in sync.
Anyway, I've tried long enough, and spent a lot of money. As I say, unless someone steps forward and tells me that it's just a matter of tweaking some setting I've not yet tweaked, I'm going to buy VMWare Fusion, and encode to wmv in Windows. Maybe that's called raising the white flag, but so be it.
cheers, Malcolm

May 30th, 2009, 05:48 AM	#16
Roger Shealy Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Fayetteville, GA Posts: 772	.....and here is the rendering setting (my attachment failed in the post above). It's difficult to know exactly how all these variable should be set to be "comparable". I could slide the .wmv slider to "sharper", but then in video it may make the motion more jumpy. Certainly you have to look at the whole effect, including how the video presents itself on the display medium one selects to show their work. Attached Thumbnails Last edited by Roger Shealy; May 30th, 2009 at 07:26 AM.

May 31st, 2009, 10:13 PM	#17
Wacharapong Chiowanich Major Player Join Date: May 2008 Location: Bangkok, Thailand Posts: 400	My guess (could be wrong) is the sliding scale of "Video Smoothness" may be related somewhat to the level of bit rates used to encode the source video. In your case, the sharpest or the right edge of the scale could mean best quality but at the expense of highest bit rates. On the other hand, the smoothest or the left edge of the scale could mean the lowest bit rates that would allow the output to play more smoothly on lesser computer systems but at the expense of lower quality video. I agree different computer systems are not equal in terms of dealing with a particular encoder/NLE or codec. There are just too many factors involved to say which one is better that the others. IMHO, though, if you are already comfortable with any computer system and NLE, you could probably say one codec is more suitable than the others once you take into account similar bit rate sizes and similar processing times as in your tests. Wacharapong

June 9th, 2009, 03:00 PM	#18
Malcolm Hamilton Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 844	Hi there, I'll add to the wmv vs. H.264 discussion by saying — and until yesterday I thought I was the only person to experience this oddity, but now I'm told that it's not uncommon if you're using a Mac — that files I compress to wmv are useless, because the audio falls out of sync. I have a MacBook Pro, 4GB RAM, recent versions of QuickTime and Flip4Mac... what else... I've purchased Squeeze and Episode (yes, I've spent hundreds of dollars trying to solve this problem, not to mention the hours I've spent on the phone to tech help at both Sorenson and Telestream), and tried every permutation and combination of data rates and whatever else, and yes, I've tried MPEG Streamclip and Visual Hub too... and nothing has worked. So — and if I'm wrong to do this, please tell me why — I blame the wmv format, on the Mac side of things anyway. The advice I'm now getting is to purchase VMWare Fusion, and run Squeeze or Episode or some other encoder in Windows XP. I plan to do this, but only because I have a client who insists on wmv (and not H.264, unfortunately). Regards, Malcolm

June 9th, 2009, 06:19 PM	#19
Roger Shealy Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Fayetteville, GA Posts: 772	Malcolm, No doubt each platform makes its own format easy. When I render to .wmv using Vegas 8's on my PC, it removes interlacing automatically from 60i when render to 24P or 30P and the sound works great. When I use .mp4, I get interlacing. I'm sure I can get rid of it, but it's just one more thing I have to figure out.

June 9th, 2009, 07:52 PM	#20
Malcolm Hamilton Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 844	It is frustrating, isn't it. The chap who (on another forum) said the problem was systemic to Macs knows a lot more than I do, so I was relieved to hear him say it wasn't just me. And yet I still have the sneaking suspicion that there are Mac users who encode to wmv perfectly well, with audio in sync. Anyway, I've tried long enough, and spent a lot of money. As I say, unless someone steps forward and tells me that it's just a matter of tweaking some setting I've not yet tweaked, I'm going to buy VMWare Fusion, and encode to wmv in Windows. Maybe that's called raising the white flag, but so be it. cheers, Malcolm