Codec most suitable for wide distribution?

[jnms]

Hi, I have a website where I want to distribute animations made by myself. The users of this website are not particually computer savy, but will be wanting to download the videos.

What is the standard format for online video distribution? (This will be a commercial venture).

The video will be available in the following formats:

1080p
720p
VGA / DVD Resolution
iPod / iPhone / Smartphone

Greatful for any help...

[Selur]

mp4 container with H.264 video and aac audio is the way to go, but you will probably have to pay licenses to mpegla (http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Documents/AVC_TermsSummary.pdf).

[jnms]

mp4 container with H.264 video and aac audio is the way to go, but you will probably have to pay licenses to mpegla (http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Documents/AVC_TermsSummary.pdf).

Ok thanks for the reply. Though I am a little bit confused...

The H.264 format requires royalty payments if it is used for video distribution?

[Selur]

To be frank I'm not totally sure (it's not a problem if it's not commerical), http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=65403 might help clearing up what and if you need to license other than that writing a request to the folks over at mpegla might help.

[Selur]

4. If a Web site were to charge subscription fees for up-front access to its content, and among that content happened to be links to, or embedded streams of, videos that were created using H.264 for which there appeared to be no commercial intent at the time of creation, is anyone responsible for royalties? The producer, the Web site, the viewer? (For example, say The Wall Street Journal under a paywall was to host an H.264 video that it presents as having been independently produced, and the paywall pertains to the site as a whole.)
MPEG LA: Yes, since the Web site is receiving remuneration for the AVC video content it makes available on a subscription basis, it would benefit from the coverage our AVC License provides. The amount of royalties owed, if any, would depend on the number of Subscribers to that website during a calendar year: 100,000 or fewer subscribers/year = no royalty; 100,001 - 250,000 subscribers/year = $25,000; 250,001 - 500,000 subscribers/year = $50,000; 500,001 - 1,000,000 subscribers/year = $75,000; and more than 1,000,000 subscribers/year = $100,000.

see: http://www.betanews.com/article/10-questions-for-MPEG-LA-on-H264/1274306999

this and the rest that's in http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Documents/AVC_TermsSummary.pdf looks like you probably have to pay license fees, but it depends on you exact business model

[jnms]

Thanks again Selur, that certainly helps.

I won't be using subscription fees for the videos, they will be pay-per-download. However I will certainly have less than 100,000 customers per year. I'm not sure how that will apply.

[Selur]

I'm not a lawyer or an MPEG LA License professional, but reading:

For (b) (1) where an End User pays directly for video services on a Title-by-Title basis
(e.g., where viewer determines Titles to be viewed or number of viewable Titles is
otherwise limited), royalties for video greater than 12 minutes (there is no royalty for a
Title 12 minutes or less) are (beginning January 1, 2006) the lower of 2% of the price
paid to the Licensee (on first Arms Length Sale of the video) or $0.02 per Title
(categories of Licensees include Legal Entities that are (i) replicators of physical media,
and (ii) service/content providers (e.g., cable, satellite, video DSL, internet and mobile)
of VOD, PPV and electronic downloads to End Users).

I would guess you need to pay $0.02 pet title

Cu Selur

[jnms]

Thanks... Looks like it will be some messing around for sure.

Seems that H.264 is on the way to being a video standard. I guess there is no real alternative that has such wide usage?

[Selur]

Nope, not really,...

avi (MPEG-4 ASP, MP3) -> requires licenses, is wide spread, but no good for streaming (unless remuxed).
wmv (video: vmw/vc-1, audio: wma) -> is free to use, but mainly windows centric
webm (video: vp7, audio: vorbis) -> is free to use but not so wide spread. (google tries to push it from time to time, but stand alone player fill probably not support it)
ogg(video: theora, audio: vorbis) -> is free to use but not really wide spread.
all the rest I can think of atm. are a. not wide spread and b. produce a far worse size/quality ratio.

Cu Selur

[jnms]

Looks like H.264 it is then.

Is this supported on iPod and iPhone and other such devices?

[Selur]

Depending on the settings you use (need to be Quicktime compatible for apple products; + not all resolutions and features are supported on each device) H.264 should play fine.

[pandy]

MPEG-1 - maybe old but supported everywhere - quality vs bitrate is quite OK - for progressive content can be more than sufficient.