HD Web Video Test: FLV vs AVC vs WMV vs XVID, 960x540 @ 2 kbps

[Bubblevision]

I'm trying to decide how to publish HD video on the web since Stage6 closed down so I've done a comparison test of HD web video formats at 960 x 540 and 2000 kbps CBR. I've published 4 contenders:

- FLV On2 VP6 2-pass in Flix Pro
- AVC in Sony AVC in Vegas Pro
- WMV 9 2-pass in Vegas Pro
- Xvid in VirtualDub frameserved from Vegas Pro

I've used 2000 kbps to try and show some differences between the codecs, but 2300 - 2500 kbps would generally give a better result.

I have provided both direct links and links to open the videos in embedded players in a Javascript popup window.

Download them and please let me know your comments about quality and playability on your sytem.

Thanks!

[Soopafresh]

Hey thanks! Nothing better than an underwater scene to show the problems with a codec.

They all had artifacts, some more than others.

Best to Worst (in my opinion)

H264
Xvid
Flash
WMV

But I'll always like the look of Xvid. H264/AVC has deblocking built in which makes a lot of scenes look like they were made of frosting (the best I can explain it).

The WMV encode had a lot of macro blocks!

[Midzuki]

Bubblevision wrote:

I've used 2000 kbps to try and show some differences between the codecs,
but 2300 - 2500 kbps would generally give a better result.

Regarding WMV, actual fast-motion scenes @ 960x540 would require 3000 kbps.
In this particular case, 2000 kbps have been sufficient for the task.
The AVC~encoding is clearly the best one; I couldn't see measurable differences
between the WMV and the XviD, certainly because of my tired eyes and my crappy monitor.

Soopafresh wrote:

The WMV encode had a lot of macro blocks!

Are you sure you didn't mean "the FLV encode"

[Bubblevision]

How on earth did that happen Midzuki? Did it play like that all the way through?

OK, well I'm not really happy with any of them except the Xvid so I'd like to look at other solutions. Could anyone help me with some of these questions:

OK, I have a some questions related to this. Forgive me if some of them are rather newbie:

1. Can I get my Xvid .avi file into a .mp4 file that can be embedded in a recent Flash Player, without losing quality? Can mp4box do this? I think the Xvid is H.263 but doesn't Flash Player need H.264?

2. Can a file encoded with x264 be embedded in a recent Flash Player? Would the viewer need to download an extra codec besides the Flash Player?

3. Is encoding with x264VFW in VirtualDub a good solution, bearing in mind I like to frameserve an AVI out of Vegas? Is there a better way to encode with x264. I am a non-expert user.

Thanks!

[Midzuki]

Well, "only" the first seven seconds of the FLV-encode were macroblocked
when decoded by the Adobe Flash Player DLLs. When decoded through ffdshow,
there were no macroblocks, but the playback was jerky

[disturbed1]

All samples played fine for me But I don't use an embedded player of any kind. Played everything through VLC and Mplayer.

AVC and xvid where the clear winners, with wmv then flv coming in last, but still looking decent enough. WMV retained a bit more color than flv. Flv had some artifacts in the busy sequences. I honestly had a tough time telling the difference between the AVC and xvid shots. The AVC did look better in the still sequences, both xvid and avc looked great in the busy sequences.

Look at ~47 seconds or so, you can see where the FLV encode just falls apart, and looks pretty nasty. WMV had a slight problem here, AVC did the best, with xvid closely behind.

In my personal opinion, I'd stick with the AVC encoding for a couple of reasons. Newer flash decoders will support the format, and you can export directly from the vegas time line with out having to setup a frame serving and launch a third party encoder. Can make batch jobs easier. Though the sony avc encoding does suck, you should be able to tune it to get better quality.

[disturbed1]

2. Can a file encoded with x264 be embedded in a recent Flash Player? Would the viewer need to download an extra codec besides the Flash Player?

Thanks!

This should help you along the way.

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=132046

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Stewart/?p=501

http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/hd_video_flash_player.html

[Bubblevision]

Thanks disturbed1.

I've done an x264 version here:

Embedded in Flash player

Direct link

How do you think this compares to the others?

My workflow was not elegant:

1. Frameserve from Vegas to VirtualDub using Debugmode Frameserver
2. Deinterlace, resize and encode with x264vfw inside VirtualDub and save as AVI
3. Save Sony AAC from Vegas
4. Mux and convert to .mp4 in mp4box

I tried a few other ways to encode with x264 and none worked. Super made the bitrate far too high. Avidemux could not read the AVI I frameserved out of Vegas. x264vfw inside Vegas generated an error.

Can anyone suggest a better workflow for this, starting with the video in Sony Vegas Pro?

[disturbed1]

Adobe has a flash V9 player for Linux 32bit, but not 64bit. I remoted in to my 32bit machine to view the embedded player - it worked with flash v9 and firefox.

After downloading the new sample, and watching closely, it is better. But, I'd still weigh the time/effort involved vs. the improved quality. The quality is a little higher, but you will have to decide if it's worth the extra effort. Nothing beats being able to export from the timeline directly to a finished format.

If you don't mind the extra work, and the goal is highest quality possible, encode to x264 with 2pass using the command line encoder. You can make it look even better. 2000kb/s is a bit of room to play with, and I'm sure the source is of great quality. Don't remember if Vegas can export to a file that avisynth can load or not, I believe there's a plugin that will do it with out rendering. But that's the way I'd go about it to achieve highest quality. IMO The Sony AVC export is a great balance between quality and ease of work. I guess it boils down to how many of these you'll need to do, and how much time you'll have available to devote to it.

Troll around the doom9 forums, there's some real x264 experts there, plus the devs tend to hang out as well. No better source of advice than from the horse's mouth

[Bubblevision]

Thanks again disturbed1. I don't mind jumping through a few hoops to get the very best quality. I don't post that many finished videos.

The discussion is continuing here on the doom9 forum if anyone is interested.