Compressing for the web FAST and BEST quality

Does anyone know the best way to compress for the web?

For best quality?

For quickest load time?

I have Compressor so if anyone knows the in's and out's I'm new to this software.
OR is there other software that would make this process more enjoyable?
I'm going to be shooting and editing and uploading to the web as many updates as humanly possible from the road on 'Race Across America' a 3,000 mile bike race that make's the 'Tour de France' look like a joke.
So any insight would be HUGE

will be shooting Mini DV ... as this is for the web so the HD is staying home.... maybe next year..

THANK YOU!!!

Steve Todey
310-200-8056

For that you will want this

[dvcreatorslabs.com]

Michael Horton
-------------------

My two cents worth:

[www.proappstips.com]

I've had the best luck with this guide using Compressor.

You can see my results:

[homepage.mac.com]

However, be ready for looooong compression sessions. One of those set it up at night, and post the next morning things.

Cameron Young

In this thread here, I asked a similar question:

[www.lafcpug.org]

I found a 2 step process using Final Cut's "Quicktime Conversion" and then Quicktime Pro yielded the best picture quality to file-size ratio I could find.

DVCreatorlabs got mentioned in that thread, too, and I looked into using it. I opted against it because I was getting solid results for client approvals in 10 minutes or less, so if it ain't broke, why fix it. If I was doing what you were doing & compressing a final deliverable, I might take a much closer look at their product.

The Race Across America is cool, and I'll be excited to see your dispatches from the field... but come on! Nothing about the Tour De France is a joke. It might be 800 miles shorter, but the Tour is the grand-daddy gold standard of distance athletics. Endurance racing is a whole different ballpark from the sprint-caliber legs of the Tour... Three weeks under the hot French summer sun, almost half the race in mountain stages with ridiculous climbs... even with the doping scandals, you've got to tip your hat to those racers.

Michael Horton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For that you will want this
>
> [dvcreatorslabs.com]

I agree with Michael on this one. After the presentation at the last meeting, I bought it the next day. It is a killer app.

You'll enjoy the process, for sure!

--
Eric Harnden
Quintessential Studios
---------------------------------
[wordpress.quintessentialstudios.net]
[twitter.com]

> so if it ain't broke, why fix it

Strange, I never take things with that approach. I always check stuff out with calculated risks.

DvcCast... I beta tested it, and use it constantly. It's extremely fast, does what it claims to, without a hassle. Only issue issue is that I'm in Windows country too, but I can really see how WMV falls apart over transitions as compared to H.264.



www.strypesinpost.com

ive been doing a number of tests with compression for a VERY low-tech windows audience.

i have been using h.264 for a while due to its high quality and very precise user control.

but the audience i was playing to complained about load times (which was odd because it was a progressive download and most machines i tested it on played in less than 10 sec) and some due to outdated qt players couldnt even see it

so, i gave flv/swf a shot via on2's flix pro. and to my surprise, i got a result that was less than HALF of the h.264 in filesize and still retained a decent level of playback control and not too much of a quality hit.

only downside is you have to have dreamweaver (or be a web savvy type to hand code it) to add the swf/html interface to the flv. but in my world - thats a small price to pay

the following are the test pages shown to the client-

here is the original 144meg h.264:
[understandinc.com]

here is the 57meg flv:
[understandinc.com]

H.264 with a .mov wrapper as well as mpeg4 has been supported by flash 9. I'm not a web guy, but i suppose H.264 can be embedded into a webpage as well in a .swf wrapper (and i think youtube and vimeo supports that).

The on2 codec isn't that bad. The only issue is where the keyframes go. Do they read compression markers?



www.strypesinpost.com

Man, have things changed in just a few years. Wasn't so long ago that the questions were, "Is this for broadcast? No? How do you want it, Beta or VHS?"

Calling different compression set-ups as a "recipe" is apt. Little of this, less of that, now, how's it look?

Cameron Young