VideoHelp Forum




+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    I've been getting amazing file size reduction using Flip4Mac to create WMV's, but someone said I might be able to do the same with certain settings in Quicktime, to end up with a .mov. The last one I did started out as a 160MB .mov, and became about a 6MB WMV, with no significant loss in quality.
    Quote Quote  
  2. I'm a MEGA Super Moderator Baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Sweden
    Search Comp PM
    what video codec are you using? if you use h264 you should get same quality as wmv.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member terryj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    N35°25.24068, W097°34.204
    Search Comp PM
    yes, for QT .mov's , file reduction is all in the Codec you choose.
    You choose Animation or Motion Jpeg-A, you get high file sizes
    at great quality. You use 3ivx D4.5 or h.264, you can adjust
    to get small size/ good to great quality.
    "Everyone has to learn, so that they can one day teach."
    ------------------------------------------------------
    When I'm not here, Where can I be found?
    Urban Mac User
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Palo Alto, California USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Antoniola
    I've been getting amazing file size reduction using Flip4Mac to create WMV's, but someone said I might be able to do the same with certain settings in Quicktime, to end up with a .mov. The last one I did started out as a 160MB .mov, and became about a 6MB WMV, with no significant loss in quality.
    Yeah, the question isn't really "can X be as small as Y." You can make anything very small; it's all a matter of quality for a given file size. And for that, h264 today is arguably the "best" in terms of quality per file size. QT containers happily accommodate h264. XviD is also pretty good (and far less complex, mathematically speaking, so it encodes much faster, and takes fewer mips to decode).

    Going from 160MB to 6MB may or may not be miraculous; it depends on what format that 160MB was in to begin with. If it was uncompressed, or only lightly compressed, that level of filesize reduction is entirely ordinary. Think about audio CD crunching down to mp3 by more than a factor of 10 with only minor quality degradation. Same basic concept.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Thanks for all the info. That really helps me understand a few things about compression, quality and file size. Seems like h264 is the choice codec. For web compatibility, however, I'm under the assumption that WMV is what all those PC users prefer, since there aren't many who have Quicktime.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member zoobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Search Comp PM
    since windows is #1, I chose compatiblilty with wmv
    you may want to look at flv also with high compatibility
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    For web, use flv as both Macs and PCs have readily available, stable, high-performance decoders from Adobe.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!