Facebook supports HD
 

I just noticed that Facebook supports HD. Looks fantastic. Their HD looks a little better than Vimeo, though Vimeo claims they've chosen a data rate that supports the average computer/network performance of their audience.
--------------------
Take it back. From my work machines, today, Facebook "HD" looks worse than Vimeo's. I wonder what happened. The previous night, Facebook looked slightly better immediately after uploading in side to side comparisons using Google Chrome browsers.
----------
Another update. It seems as if Facebook is confused about whether to play the video in HD quality. If I play an "HD" video, it defaults to the HD quality playback option but the video doesn't look HD. If I switch HD off, then the quality is just as bad. If I re-enable HD, the HD quality is slightly better than Vimeo.

Facebook supports Vimeo? Only thing is I cant seem to embed videos on facebook

Facebook HD looks way better than Vimeo to my eyes. Downloading in FireFox with DownloadHelper tells me that they use .mp4. Quicktime does not show me the data-rate though. However, my 1:11 HD video clip was 20.6 MB, which seems pretty big to me. Plus, they kept my frame rate at 30fps. Much more impressive than Vimeo.

I'm back to youtube, now it's better than anybody else,

Here are screen grabs from Facebook, Vimeo, YouTube and QuickTime Player. The same 720p30 file was uploaded to all except for Vimeo, which prefers 720p24. The Web players assume standard video levels and seem to correct to RGB by adding contrast. Quicktime player doesn't do this correction, so it looks a little washed out, but it is not recompressed as for the Web players.

To me, Facebook looks the best as can be seen in the details on the background palm leaves above the baby's head and the pine tree in back of the bench. Vimeo seems to have the most color noise, although it's not as blatant in a still frame. Since the Quicktime image is the pre-uploaded 5 MBits/second 720p30 file, it will have no recompression artifacts.

Facebook
http://gentlemensfightingclub.com/Im...p_Facebook.tif

Vimeo
http://gentlemensfightingclub.com/Im...dcap_Vimeo.tif

YouTube
http://gentlemensfightingclub.com/Im...ap_YouTube.tif

QuickTime Player
http://gentlemensfightingclub.com/Im...timePlayer.tif

It doesn't matter anyway, any material I've put up gets taken right off in 2 days or less. They think I'm steeling it. They sent me some email to fight it but their web link was messed up. Now I can't upload any video on facebook. Something is seriously wrong!!

i've had that happen when i've included copyrighted music in my home videos...namely sony copyrighted music.

Why would they take it down if I'm not selling anything? I have stuff on youtube and Vimeo as well and they haven't said anything. Also, when selling my movies on DVD, the distributors said since I were selling a certain amount of copies, the music rights weren't needed. What gives FACEBOOK!!!

Greg, "what gives" is that you're infringing upon someone's copyright and it doesn't sound like you've secured the proper rights/releases (my apologies if you indeed HAVE). The fact that you're "not selling anything" is irrelevant, and for some distributor to give you legal advice based upon some sales threshold is seriously flawed, as well.

I suggest you speak with an IP attorney regarding your rather flippant usage of copyrighted music in your productions (paid, sold, or done merely for the joy of it all). An infringement battle with one of the major music labels and/or music publishers could be very costly indeed.

And the fact that "everyone else is doing it" is also irrelevant. Woe be it, if they decide to make the example out of YOU.

Be cautious,
Brian Brown
BrownCow Productions

Just saying, why would facebook make a HUGE issue out of a 60 second clip and youtube and Vimeo don't? I've tried to contact facebook many times to explain all content in my clips are my own but their support isn't up to par.

Has anyone had any luck contacting them regarding this issue?

No one here is in any position to answer that, but the *most likely* reason is because these are different entities with different terms of service which are not expected nor required to operate identically, even though this is an infringement issue.

We're pretty much finished here, however.