Video shot by my stablizer[2]

[Charles Papert]

The reason I asked about whether your rig has changed was that you are always seeking out demo footage from other rigs, as you once said so that you could compare them to your own rig. My contention then (I don't know which thread this discussion took place in, don't think it was this one) that it was irrelevant since they were all done by different operators at different skill levels. I think it safe to say that if you had posted your current video on a web site offering your stabilizer, it would have had quite a different effect on sales than the earlier videos. That is as much a compliment to the improvement of your operating as it is a proof of my earlier point!

[Leigh Wanstead]

Hi Charles Papert,

Thanks for the point.

I did not realize the significance of your point though as I always heard that it is not the camera, but the person behind the camera make a difference.

Thanks again.

Regards
Leigh

[Leigh Wanstead]

Hello everyone,

I think that I need to test how is handheld shot compare to stablizer's shot, so I make this video. First part mainly handheld shot, second part is my stablizer's shot. I can feel my hand shaking in handheld shot, and I wish that I have a crane. Shot by JVC GY-DV5000 with Fujinon s20x6.4BRM-SD lense.

WMV format
File Size around 52m bytes

Click here

Small file
WMV format
File Size around 28m bytes

Click here

Regards
Leigh

[Leigh Wanstead]

Hello everyone,

I just want to see if I can manage to shoot low angle again. It is hard and I think that I need more practise.

Shot by JVC GY-DV5000 with Fujinon s20x6.4BRM-SD lense.

WMV format
File Size around 64m bytes

Click here

Sorry that I do not have more space to put a small size file.

Regards
Leigh

[Mikko Wilson]

Leigh,
If space is a concern, then you really *Should* be posting smaller files.


- Mikko

[Terry Thompson]

Originally Posted by Mikko Wilson

Leigh,
If space is a concern, then you really *Should* be posting smaller files.


- Mikko

I agree. If it's too large a file not many will download it and hence, no feedback. A thirty second clip at a decent size can be created with the file size below 10 meg. We can tell if your work is good without extremely high resolution or size. We're not talking postage stamp here nor "Cinerama". Something in between.

Tery

[Mikko Wilson]

Leigh,
What program do you use to make your .WMVs?
Beacuse if you use Windows Media Encoder (free from microsoft) i can send you a good set of presets for making nice files for web.

Personally the settings I use for web encoding are:
320x240, 15fps. - That's VHS quality at ½ framerate. I encode the stream at 150kpbs. Resultign in a stream that for all practical purposes looks decent on a computer and is about 1MB per min. - That's good enough that msot anyone on even a Dial-Up will download a 60 clip!
Or 512x288 (16:9) at 25fps (i'm in PAL land, jsut like you) - That's allready getting close to pal resolution at full framerate!
The stream is 400kbps resulting in about 14MB for a 5 min clip - Definatly in the range for most uses.

Examples of above for comparison can be seen in the Video Gallery of my website at http://mikko.n3.net

You are a programmer, i'm sure you know this stuff...

- Mikko

[Leigh Wanstead]

Hi Mikko,

Thanks

I thought that 720x480, 29.97fps with 2mbps would offer the reasonable quality which was I encoded in that video. I like the video encoding quality, of couse that quality can't beat origianl DV AVI quality on clarity. I can clearly see 320x240, 15fps in full screen mode really fuzzy as I was encoding the same video on last Saturday and I don't like that. I will try to delete some my old stuff on my server and upload the same video at a setting suggested by you.

Regards
Leigh

Originally Posted by Mikko Wilson

Leigh,
What program do you use to make your .WMVs?
Beacuse if you use Windows Media Encoder (free from microsoft) i can send you a good set of presets for making nice files for web.

Personally the settings I use for web encoding are:
320x240, 15fps. - That's VHS quality at ½ framerate. I encode the stream at 150kpbs. Resultign in a stream that for all practical purposes looks decent on a computer and is about 1MB per min. - That's good enough that msot anyone on even a Dial-Up will download a 60 clip!
Or 512x288 (16:9) at 25fps (i'm in PAL land, jsut like you) - That's allready getting close to pal resolution at full framerate!
The stream is 400kbps resulting in about 14MB for a 5 min clip - Definatly in the range for most uses.

Examples of above for comparison can be seen in the Video Gallery of my website at http://mikko.n3.net

You are a programmer, i'm sure you know this stuff...

- Mikko

[Mikko Wilson]

AARRGGHHH!!!
my net connection just bugged out and I lost a big post i just wrote about video compression.

here's the short version:

Leigh: 320x240 is PLEANTY for the web. - you dont' have to watch full screen!
- infact i prefer not to as I like ot be able ot give feedback while i'm watchign a clip in a smaller window.

Check your encoding settings!
720x480, 29.97fps is NTSC video! New Zeland is a PAL country.
You are actually DEGRADING your video quality by encoding at 29.97fps! Drop it down to 25fps at least! (it will take a 6th of your files sizes, that's 10 megs off your last post!)
Preferably use 12.5fps - it will drop your fiule size in half from 25fps without sacreficing any resolution. I promise you will barely notice the drop in framerate!

Get it down to 320x240 and 12.5fps at a "high quality" setting and it will look fine for what you need it for! I promise!

And USE THE RIGHT PRESETS!
Using a preset for "2mbps video over LAN" is great if you are on a LAN!
But this is the internet, yoru target audience is mostnly on meduim speed cable and DSL modems.. so use the "video for broadband" settings! you will get a mcuh happeir audience, and in return mcuh more feedback whcih will improve yoru work.
- This holds true not only in web video but all performances, be it broadcast (which i've been dooing for 8 years) or Theater (10 years):
KNOW YOUR AUDIENCE!

- Mikko

[Leigh Wanstead]

Hi Mikko,

Thanks for the advice.

I bought the JVC GY-DV5000U and PANASONIC GS400 camera, both are NTSC cameras. And I did know NZ was PAL country at the time I purchased the cameras. My main interest is USA market and that is the reason I bought both cameras in NTSC.

Regards
Leigh

Originally Posted by Mikko Wilson

Check your encoding settings!
720x480, 29.97fps is NTSC video! New Zeland is a PAL country.
You are actually DEGRADING your video quality by encoding at 29.97fps! Drop it down to 25fps at least! (it will take a 6th of your files sizes, that's 10 megs off your last post!)
Preferably use 12.5fps - it will drop your fiule size in half from 25fps without sacreficing any resolution. I promise you will barely notice the drop in framerate!

Get it down to 320x240 and 12.5fps at a "high quality" setting and it will look fine for what you need it for! I promise!

- Mikko

[Terry Thompson]

Leigh,

My statement still stands. If you are putting videos on the web for others to see they need to be of the size that we will actually download. There are a few who will download 70-80 meg files but not many so take Mikko's suggestion and get them down to a reasonable file size. Remember, you are doing this for us, not you.

I'm looking forward to seeing some of your latest footage so let me know when thay area available.

Thanks,

Tery

[Mikko Wilson]

Originally Posted by Leigh Wanstead

Hi Mikko,

Thanks for the advice.

I bought the JVC GY-DV5000U and PANASONIC GS400 camera, both are NTSC cameras. And I did know NZ was PAL country at the time I purchased the cameras. My main interest is USA market and that is the reason I bought both cameras in NTSC.

Regards
Leigh

An NTSC Camera in PAL land.. to each his own i guess.

Well then use 15fps!

Hmm... compatibilty seems to be a strong point with Leigh..

- Mikko

[Leigh Wanstead]

Hi Mikko,

I still think that the requirement of high video encoding rate. It is quite different than normal tripod shot. As tripod shot, most background is still and can be easily compressed by video encoder. But stablizer shot is completely different which requires huge bandwidth. Mr. Job Scholtz did a really nice job to show that by encoding a very high encoding rate and the result is fantastic. :-)

Here is the link to his demo video.

Click here

By the way, I heard that high speed internet connection is getting popular everyday worldwide. It is consider the telecommunication in New Zealand lack of competion compare to USA, but here I got 256kbps connection which is not high speed. That speed is quite reasonable to download megas of data without problem. Video always demand far more bandwidth than other forms of communication.

Regards
Leigh

[Mikko Wilson]

The first 2 of Jobs clips ar 555kbps - that's 25% of your 2mbps streams. And they looked fine.
I got fed up downloading the 3rd one (at 2,2mbps) and i'm on a 1mbps cable connection. And that was only a 26 second clip. The first frame looked fine, but after 3mins i gave up waiting for it to pregesss ot the next one.

I'm done with my advice about file sizes for you Leigh.

I'll be happy to coment on any of your futur footage you post, provided i can download it at a reasonable rate.

- Mikko

[Leigh Wanstead]

Hi Mikko,

May I suggest that you use some sorts of download manager instead of watching the video while downloading if I was guessing correctly? You might get far better experience. ;-)

Here is the link to one of these kind of softwares.

Click here

Regards
Leigh

Originally Posted by Mikko Wilson

The first 2 of Jobs clips ar 555kbps - that's 25% of your 2mbps streams. And they looked fine.
I got fed up downloading the 3rd one (at 2,2mbps) and i'm on a 1mbps cable connection. And that was only a 26 second clip. The first frame looked fine, but after 3mins i gave up waiting for it to pregesss ot the next one.

I'm done with my advice about file sizes for you Leigh.

I'll be happy to coment on any of your futur footage you post, provided i can download it at a reasonable rate.

- Mikko