NTSC Resolutions?

[codeseven]

i was just curious if some of you could tell me some ntsc resolutions that are commonly used when it comes to distributing music video rips across the net. i personally think 320x240 is too small, but i'm not sure what the next step up from there is. i've seen 352x240 which i like that as well, but i'd still like to go just a little bit higher. maybe something like 4xx by 3xx.

thx

[Tommyknocker]

Get the specs from the DVD section in the upper left.

[canadateck]

I just hope they are legal,but to answer its really up to you,and the speed of the program you use,speed of your net connection,also how long are the videos? you realy can use any res you want.

[codeseven]

most are 3 minutes to 4 minutes. i was estimating a file size of about 35m to 40m for each should be decent

[codeseven]

Get the specs from the DVD section in the upper left.

it give sthe following:

704 x 480 pixels MPEG2
352 x 480 pixels MPEG2 (Called Half-D1, same as the CVD Standard)
352 x 240 pixels MPEG2



there's nothing just a little higher than 352 x 240?

[canadateck]

720/704 x 480
352 x 480/240
Mpeg2

[canadateck]

try 720x480, what are they now?

[Tommyknocker]

You may want to try out the 352 x 480 just for giggles, then go to the 700+ resolutions. Remember, it's not the resolution, it's the bit rate that determines the flie size.

[codeseven]

You may want to try out the 352 x 480 just for giggles, then go to the 700+ resolutions. Remember, it's not the resolution, it's the bit rate that determines the flie size.

yeah i realize that. im staying 900-1100 for the bitrate of them. ill go ahead and encode them to 352x480 just to see what it looks like. i imagine it will look pretty bad though

[jimmalenko]

If we're only talking about distribution of clips over the net, IMO DVD-compliant resolutions have exactly diddly-squat to do with anything. You can make the files any frame size you want for playback on a computer. If the end user wants to put them onto VCD/SVCD/DVD, then that's their problem

The other thing is - why use MPEG-1/2 if they're intended to be watched on a computer ? surely DivX/XviD/WMV and any other MPEG-4 codec would offer the ability to use a far-larger frame size than MPEG-1/2 for the same bitrate, and still retain the same quality.

I think we need clarification of firstly the source - (I'm guessing DVD?), the "reason" for distribution, and what you expect the end user to do with these files (do you expect they'll want to make VCD/SVCD/DVD, and do you want to assist them in this process by using a compliant frame size ?)

[codeseven]

If we're only talking about distribution of clips over the net, IMO DVD-compliant resolutions have exactly diddly-squat to do with anything. You can make the files any frame size you want for playback on a computer. If the end user wants to put them onto VCD/SVCD/DVD, then that's their problem

i agree, im not going to make it perfect for them. if they want to go through the trouble of getting it on some type of disc media, then like you said, that's their problem, but i just want it to look good for when they download them, and personally i think 320/352x240 is just too small. then again im running on a 1600x1200 resolution

[Tommyknocker]

You may as well go 700+, since they're not being played, they're downloaded.

[non-linear]

You could make them 640x480, which will make them play back in a proper resolution on a PC. I would also suggest using the XviD or DivX codec, like jimmalenko pointed out, as MPEG 1 and 2 are not very good for lower bitrate stuff.