Your experience using video....

[Wheels]

Alright! A video section. CNO, how about an FAQ on top of the thread (seem's like we always have to ask on new forum).

I would make a suggestion that we keep things in check, competing software companiies had a heyday on the Mac and Standalone forums, both always claiming they alone had the solution to someone's problem).

Anyway,

I'm looking for opinions, and I preface this string by saying I''ve read every thread here regarding this issue - so yes, I know what Wild Form Flix is - and I'm already considering using it.

That said, I respectfully request your opinion on this subject - unless you work for a software company that sells a Flash video solutions. (No offense Jonathan - but I'm looking for the opinion's of those who have used your software).

If you've used MX, Sorenson Spark Pro and Flix - please share your experience.

I'm building an MX interface, have a dozen different video clips (no voice sync, 1 to 10 meg's each) and seem to have three options.

1. Use QuickTime pop-ups (I don't care much for JS pop-ups and it means two plugins to see the content)

2. Use Streaming loadMovieNum() in MX (hard to preload when using Sorenson .swf's alone, but I'd like the client to be able to create their own .swf's)

3. Using Flix (Not sure, everything I've read about it here and at were-here is from the company's board surfer - who does give good advice on many subjects).

If you've used any or all of these methods I'd love to hear what comprimises you've come across, or any method for controlling the preload of a _root.level loaded movie. I'm just about to finish up my current project, but have yet to decide on the delivery method for the video - although I have experimented with all and can easily impliment any of them.

Thanks,

5G

[aashu.com]

I also played much with video ...

I want to know something more from your side ...

its a projector? is so then on Windows/Mac?

[secondsign]

i have been using flash mx video on a few differnt projects.
A few issues, one being the memary error that you get on a mac when you try and import large video. perhaps there is a fix for this that i have not pickeed up on though. At the moment am testing sorenson squeeze and finding that pretty good, though of course as you point out, there are issues as you cant script that the way you would a video created in mx. am playing around with how i control the sorenson .swf from the timeline.
Have found the synch probems you get with flash mx a problem, that is with files longer than 1 or 2 minutes.
Sorensen squeeze doesnt seem to have the same problem.
And yes, preloading those movies is a big of a hassle too.
still working on the best procedure for that. Am about the try just exporting a flv file then bringin that in to add the actionscript and preloaders, but again as you point out that is no good for clients that want to make there own .swf
All in all though the compression is pretty fine, i always start with either a straight DV file from Final Cut pro or a QT compressed with sorenson 3. I know that peole that have begun with files that are already compressed with
other compression codecs have had .swf file size problems.
Am about to use flashmx and sorenson squeeze for a 12 week mini online doco series. compressing the movies cut in FCP, and then comressed with sorenson, so far so good.
do you have any specific queries.
Anyway, enough of a rave.
Back to the grind

ss

[Wheels]

I would like to have the option of burning this to a projector, but right now it will be web delivered.

I found Sorenson Sqeeze for MX (w/Spark Pro) to have excellent compression, noticeably smaller file sizes. Beginning with uncompressed video is a priority here.

The biggest problem seems to be preloading and positioning, I can't seem to find a way to position a loaded .swf??

It looks like for now I'll have to process the video for the client, add the preloader and positon by importing the Sqeeze .swf then exporting again.

5G

[secondsign]

positioning is fine if you are loading into a target movie clip.
if you are loading into a level you can position using
_x and _y properties, but u have to do it after the clip
is loaded.
i have been using it for cds, but you do run into the audio synch prob when going for bigger and longer files.
from my understianding you dont want to reimport the sqeeze swf, cos that is more compression. but if you import as a flv file, i belive that mx retains the compression settings,.
that is compress with sorenson but to a flv file with is them imported into mx.

[Wheels]

Thanks secondsign,

Just wondering, what actionScript are you using to reposition?

_level1._x=100; or something like that?

Also, have you done standalone for OSX?

As far as your memory issue on the Mac, you must be on os 9? If so, increase the memory for the Flash program (command -i, memory) and/or increase your virtual memory under "control panels, memory". Or are you on OSX? How big are the files?

5G
[Edited by Wheels on 08-08-2002 at 12:10 AM]

[whiterabbit]

In the middle of next week we are posting a 900 x 430 flash video that streams at "comparably" very low bit rates, I think lower than any DV codec will be able get it without sacrificing picture quality. This was done using Simulated Video and yes we do have a product that we sell but you dont have to buy it :) its not our main business.

Simulated video is a sequence of images on the Flash timeline. Because its actually a part of the movie you have full control beyond any other method period. Its also compatable with Flash 4 and up so you dont have the compatability issues like you do with mx or the other DV codecs.

As for other peoples view points- 1000 on-line viewrers polled voted "SV" 82% as good as the newest dv codecs. That was in December of last year. This new demo blows anything we have ever seen away and its the first of a series of three. This one demonstrates screen sectioning, interaction with vector elements and other video clips, using different size video, different fps, and animating across the stage all within the same movie and darn its all done in Flash.

Our product just modifies the end file so the flash player can play it back. As far as Flix, if you need pro quality video then you are not going to be happy with flix. If you need an automated solution that is easy to use then use flix.

Cheers for now, next week I will post in this new cool video forum the link where the new demo video will be located.

Jorge Pease
Manta Productions.com, inc.

[Wheels]

Well that's certain to get a response from the guys at Flix, but that's why I worded this thread the way I did. Too many times I click on subject looking for some insight and the only response is from a software representative. I'm glad they are here, helping out - but often nobody else responds because they think the problem has been solved.

So, let's see it. I'm ready to try anything once, twice if it works. I'm not concerned with easy, nothing is ever easy. It's always a matter of digging a little deeper to get what you really want out of Flash.

I look forward to seeing what you have.

5G
[Edited by Wheels on 08-10-2002 at 11:24 AM]

[kar13]

I've used both Flix and Squeeze. I like Squeeze much better. I like the easy interface and got great results. Also, there was no easy way to batch using flix, something that 's a snap to do in Squeeze. Perhaps Flix has updated this huge drawback to it's product by now, I don't know. But for my money, Squeeze is the best.

[whiterabbit]

Hi again,

here is the link to our large screen flash video demo. It's a bit rough as we made some mistakes in the shoot (we lost our location and had to build the set digitally, our nightmare).

file size is 4 MB and it lasts 60 seconds so even slow 300kbps cable and dsl wont have to wait that long. Try to remember however that video of this size requires a fairly powerfull computer 450mhz or better would be best.

This is Flash 4 encoded for best compatability.

enjoy it

http://www.mantaproductions.com/fullscreen


jp

[Jonathan_B]

Well, since people are talking about us, I figured I would chime in (sorry Wheels, but maybe you have a question I can answer for you).

I just want to point out that Flix is the only software available that will output a high quality MX video SWF with both 1-pass and 2-pass VBR, as well as a Flash 3-6 video SWF (with memory management) that plays in any Flash Player version 3-6. Additionally, Flix is the only software that will convert standard video into vector video.

Kar, I am a bit confused by your comment that there was "no easy way to batch using flix". We have a drag and drop interface that allows you to batch encode an unlimited number of files and automatically adjust file names.

And as for Manta Productions, I would just like to point out that they provide custom Flash development services, not Flash video encoding software.

jb

http://www.wildform.com

"I found in all my testing, and reported, that Flix definitely does a much better job than Squeeze in quality and file size. You definitely have a great product there."
-- Jen deHaan, Flash MX Bible contributor

[kar13]

When I tried Flix a while back, the only way to batch was by typing some long string of commands into the c:> prompt. Perhaps that was a very early version or only the trial version. I'm not sure. I did state that Flix may have changed this feature by now. I wasn't trying to bash the product....just give my experience using it.
:)
-kar-

[Jonathan_B]

Hi.
We've had batch for a long time now.
Check it out. There's a free demo.
jb

[whiterabbit]

Originally posted by Jonathan_B


And as for Manta Productions, I would just like to point out that they provide custom Flash development services, not Flash video encoding software.



Actually we do provide software Jonathan we just dont mention it every time we make a post. After all the goal of the people looking into video is to find the solution that works best for them. Having a moderator commercializing his product continuously is a bit out of line wouldnt you say.

[Jonathan_B]

Do you have a demo of it? I'd love to check it out.
jb

[whiterabbit]

We dont have free demos. The software (as I mentioned above is memory management software). Our video is Flash and you just got me to thinking, it would be really interesting if an article was done on all the possible solutions for swf video including mx video.

We could use one control clip and then another seperate clip to demonstrate as clearly as possible the pros and cons of each approach and overall potential for swf video on the net. I think it would be an excellent way to educate the flash world as to the best option for a particular use in the swf video world.

A point system that includes all standard concerns such as compatability, file size, quality, interactive capability, ease of use, etc etc... plus the specific advantages each product offers, to be fair and educational would be cool and then we could post the results so flashkit members can make side by side comparisons for themselves.

Whats everybody think? I think it would be great!!


Jp
Manta Productions

[Wheels]

Excellent suggestion Whiterabbit,

That's why I started this thread. This forum is here to share our knowledge and save each other the frustration of having to reinvent every time there is a complicated solution to a common problem(s).

I was planning on starting an unofficial FAQ as well, but I think comparison of methods is just as crucial to development. Also, helping each other finish scripts that don't seem to do everything they should - like the one below.

This is a method I am using to load and repostion a .swf file created with Spark (thus defaulting the movie to 0,0):

video is a MC w/button actions dynamically assigned.
<i>
_root.video.onEnterFrame = function() {
_level6000._x = 175;
_level6000._y = 100;
};
//delete this.onEnterFrame - not solved yet (conditionals don't seem to work, may do a set inteval).

_root.video.onPress = function() {
loadMovieNum("video/test.swf", 6000);
};</i>

<b>Solved, see unofficial FAQ:</b> http://board.flashkit.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=356715

5G
[Edited by Wheels on 08-15-2002 at 02:35 PM]

[whiterabbit]

Okay well I am in, as proponents of Flash video, we can definately use an objective comparison that extends even out to include traditional encoding methods such as QT WM and Real . Streaming content providers have little use for swf video but I would say that for on demand P2P scenarios swf video has some very strong points and probably a huge market potential. Almost all our customers we design sites for ask us for video, in fact we are about to do some cool boxing video workouts for one of our clients. I bet its the same for alot of flash developers.

I can contribute substancially in the area of SV. If the swf video guys (flix, at least but maybe also swideo.com, livetronix.com, vid2swf, flashants.com, turbine and whatever others) are in, then I can see about getting some of the guidelines used in the traditional streaming codecs and we can all contribute as to which guidelines can apply or add new parameters as needed and we can even take it a step further and include the dv codec comparison results from streamingmedia.com.

Then all we need are a couple of contril clips. Maybe an independent film maker can contribute a good movie trailer. Instead of bumbling around with claims that may or not be substanciated we can lay it out on the line and get some conclusive results.

In the past we have conducted various surveys. I think this would be a great opportunity to integrate a little viewer poll. I wonder if Flashkit would be interested in supporting this. Most of the other codec comparisons I have seen get you do download the file so you can view it locally, that might not be a bad idea either.

Lets see first if Jonathan from flix is in and in the meantime I will contact the other guys who have swf conversion softwares and see if I can start tracking down some relevant info.

[Wheels]

I think this would be extremely helpful to many designers.

I think the time has come where every site will have some kind of video - real or simulated. Broadband is speading faster than the West Nile virus, thus the internet is finally opening up to it's real potential for interactive content delivery. This of course means that that initially there will be abuses. Think "skip intro" and you'll know what I mean. (I still get backlash from people who think of Flash as an inconvenience, having to download a plug-in to see an intro that dumps you into an HTML page).

But embedding video has so many advantages that it's hard to ignore the benefits. The biggest advantage I see so far is reducing the plugin to just Flash. Before MX - I was designing with F5 and QT popups. How inconvenient for the viewer if they had niether.

I'm trying to push the limits of what I can do effectively in Flash 6, and I think many other designers will be doing the same. We could all benefit from some form of codec and method comparison that helps to reduce the abuse factor - making Flash look like a bad alternative to "real" video.

I'm quite surprised to find so little information on Macromedia's site in regards to video. I think they have spent most of their energy on the MX server, and not so much on the http methods. I guess we're on our own. So, count me in too. I should be able to put up some server space to store some of the source examples and I can help with the scripting methods moderation.

5G

[Jonathan_B]

My feeling is that the best way for someone to see the quality and ease of implementation with our software (or any software for that matter) is to test it for themselves by downloading one of our free demos and encoding their own video, with their own settings that have been set with their own implementation needs in mind. This way a potential user can make up their own mind about whether a solution works for them.
Our demos are fully functioning (except for a watermark placed in the output) and potential customers can test out all the outputs and functionality for free.
And if you are looking for information, you are also welcome to come our website where we have posted many FAQs, tutorials and sample FLAs relating to video. These include information on creating players, jukeboxes, rich media email and advertising, CDs, and many other subjects, and they are all available free of charge to everyone.
jb
http://www.wildform.com

[whiterabbit]

Hey Wheels thats cool, sounds like a plan. Macromedia has to consider the strategic side of everything. Who knows, maybe they felt they would lose marrket share from Director Software. Better to make people buy two softwares....

Okay so flix is out and understandably so. A side by side comparison if it comes out bad, can mean ruin for that product. Even if you are confident its a risk. That doesnt mean however that somebody else who is an expert and proponent of flix cant encode the samples. Side by side comparisons are far more conclusive than downloading a demo, we need a control clip to do this right.

I have not contacted the other guys yet, been swamped, but I will do it right now and I will start putting together a faq on SV and its pros and cons.

you can also reach me at
jorge@mantaproductions.com so we dont weigh down the board here. We still also need a bit of help from a Flix expert, and maybe you want to encode the mx video. I actually know a guy Peter from Proxivideo.com who claims to have good success with MX. I know he would be into encoding some samples a well. He has some samples posted I believe.

cheers
jp

[Jonathan_B]

Jorge,
I would very much like to test out your video encoding capabilities. Can you tell me whether what you are offering is software that I can buy and use myself, or whether it is a service I have to pay for by the encoding. Also, can you tell me how much your service costs.
Thanks for the info.

jb
http://www.wildform.com

[Wheels]

Alright, but I'm assuming you were actually inviting Jonathan to participate, not precluding him. It looks like he's taken up the challenge.

I would also like to see what end-users can come up with using the different software and methods on the same sample. Let's have two - on at 5 MB and another at 50MB (both raw .avi?). They should have lip-sync somewhere in the movie and a medium amount of movement. Anyone could download the source video and post a link with their methods and settings.

Whiter, are you selling software or services? Doesn't matter too much - just wondering.

5G

[whiterabbit]

Hi, Sorry I had to prep a shoot for tommorow.

Yes I was inviting Flix to participate. As I see it the main methods we are comparing are SV (sequences), .swf video, and MX video.

As to the software question : Yes, we have a software called SWF Optimizer that we have sold worldwide (from our web site) with The SV Bible a CD book on simulated video for the last 10 months or so. Our software modifies a swf file 3,4, or 5 so that it allows the Flash player to reclaim ram continuosly as the video plays. The software is Mac/PC you get both versions and the book $99 and it does its job quite nicely.

In case anyone is wondering on the importance of memory management , consider that a small 3mb video clip without memory management will consume around 100MB of ram to play.


I think I answered all the questions. Im tired though might have missed something and got to get some sleep, we will be up at daybreak tommorow to shoot #1 Drum and Base scratch DJ KRAZE for the last 3 years running. I guess my ears are going to be pounded.

have a good night

jp

[whiterabbit]

Okay,

I have contacted the following comapnies and alerted them to this article, comparison, whatever you want to call it.

swideo.com, livetronix.com, javakitty.com (vid2swf), turbine (they have a support forum on these boards) flashants.com

Who wants to represent MX? Like I said I can contact proxivideo.com but it should probably be somebody I do not know to eliminate any questions of conflict of interest. I will post in the MX forum now.

I will pop back in tonight after the shoot and hopefully we will have the participants lined up.

cheers,

jp

[gweedo]

Looking forward to an objective report on the strengths and weaknesses of the current video conversion/compression tools. Recently made the mistake of purchasing one of the highly-touted MX video compression utilities based on what proved to be less-than-unbiased "reviews" and was terribly disappointed with the quality/compression. Was forced to (additionally) buy a competing product, with which we were ultimately pleased.

Something that would be particularly helpful is a break-down of each products limitations. For instance, although Flash allows a single SWF to be up to 16000 frames long (just under 18 minutes @ 15 fps), at least one of the products we tested was limited to 2055 frames (a little over 2 minutes @ 15 fps) - pretty damn inconvenient.

Also, what are the limitations of the current FLV format?

Much thanks for the initiative!

Gweedo.

[whiterabbit]

Usually a comparison of this type (its easy to get out of hand fast) will take a control clip and encode it at 56, 300 and 600 kbps. We are comparing mx, swf converted (native video) and SV which is not video and they are all played through Flash.

Wheels when you say 5MB and 50MB do you mean compressed. Thats gonna eat up alot of bandwidth if you consider all the different comparisons that will be taking place. Its all the same to me but I suggest we keep the clips as short as possible.

As for having end users run their own test. That's cool too but we should keep it seperate from the actual comparison or else we will be judging talent of the encoder.

Gweedo,
Yes I agree limitations should be covered in the article many of which will probably make themselves apparant in the encoded streams.

I also think we should have an extra example to demonstrate each particular systems strengths...if any.

How about a control clip? Some good uncompressed footage would be nice. Maybe this would be a good opportunity to demonstrate how well the systems work using the MiniDV format which is probably a more real world scenario.

[Jonathan_B]

I think we should have a disiniterested thirdy party encode the video. That way it illustrates how the software works in the hands of a user - as opposed to the designer of the software. The software creators can send in their recommended settings if they want to for the various bitrates - or provide a preset or settings file.
Then, we should also have a different category for standalone software solutions that end users can purchase and implement themselves, and custom services that must be paid for individually.
We also need to compare:
-the features that are available in the software to encode various formats, output various formats, resize, change the framerates, edit, crop, and create an enhanced Flash video with built in interactivity and features, etc. An interesting aspect of this would be to test how long it would take to edit, crop, add a link to, add a preloader to, and output a custom player for a given video. These are all very important parts of the software and users are very interested in this.
-the cost of encoding the video - and whether that fee is a one time fee, or whether subsequent encodings will cost additional money (perhaps we should provide the cost for a single encoding, 1,000 encodings, 10,000 encodings, and so on to provide some scale);
-the length of time it takes to create the video.

More to follow...

If you need some trailers, I have some from films that I have made (I actually put up the first film site on the internet). Or we can probably get some movie trailers from a studio.

jb
http://www.wildform.com

[whiterabbit]

Okay, I think its important that all the features of your software be looked at, but are we on the same wave length as to using traditional DV codecs output as a benchmark for quality standards.

I have from my first post on this thread been talking about pro quality video. That means video that must compete with traditional dv codecs. If you have to make any excuse to your clients about final quality then I dont care how easy it is to use, its not going to cut it.

A least this quality,

http://mantaproductions.com/demo.html

these are straight sequences no custom work like our full screen link posted earlier.

If you cant do this quality, then lets make the categories Pro Quality and Non Pro Quality so we dont waste time comparing tons of features that cant be used anyway by the pro developer.

Jorge
Manta Productions.com, inc.

[gweedo]

If you have to make any excuse to your clients about final quality then I dont care how easy it is to use, its not going to cut it.
Exactly!
Although extra features and ease of use are appreciated by the folks doing the work. The client couldn't care less about how easy the production process might be, or the feature-set of the software used. If the video quality suffers, so does the project and we risk losing business to our competitors.
Bottom line, the process or product that delivers the best quality vs. compression is the one we'll use.

[Wheels]

O.K., so what we're looking at here is a comparison of the output from Manta, Flix and Squeeze Spark, and Sqeeze Spark Pro. Right? Other's?

I agree, ease of use is not a primary concern, but it should be a consideration. I am setting up my sites so that the client can upload their own content, thus updating their site dynamically with PHP and XML. In this case, ease of use is an obvious priortity. So it is a consideration in the overall picture.

If I've done my job right, I've taken care of any scripting that needs to be attatched to an imported movie by providing for movie control once it has been loaded to the Flash movie. This is what I've been trying to cover in the FAQ. So again, the client should be able to just compress and upload their own content with no need for Flash scripting knowledge. This is what I consider "ease of use", not neccessarily my ease of use.

Whiterabbit, I was referring to the initial file size (5,50), but maybe that's not possible. I think there are two final sizes to consider though - less than a MB and whatever maximum we can possibly achieve (just to test the limit and test sound sync issues).

BTW Jonathan, I've responded to your message - but have yet to hear back from you.

5G
[Edited by Wheels on 08-18-2002 at 04:23 AM]

[whiterabbit]

Originally posted by Wheels
O.K., so what we're looking at here is a comparison of the output from Manta, Flix and Squeeze Spark, and Sqeeze Spark Pro. Right? Other's?

That sounds good but lets call it Flix Squeeze and SV. We helped SV along by making it play better on the Flash Player but its really just Flash and even though we have a product we are more interested in raising the overall quality of Flash video so that it makes it easier for us to sell our clients.


I agree, ease of use is not a primary concern, but it should be a consideration. I am setting up my sites so that the client can upload their own content, thus updating their site dynamically with PHP and XML. In this case, ease of use is an obvious priortity. So it is a consideration in the overall picture.

If I've done my job right, I've taken care of any scripting that needs to be attatched to an imported movie by providing for movie control once it has been loaded to the Flash movie. This is what I've been trying to cover in the FAQ. So again, the client should be able to just compress and upload their own content with no need for Flash scripting knowledge. This is what I consider "ease of use", not neccessarily my ease of use.

Okay. I don't recomend non developer maintenance of SV mostly because sv requires developer machines but I guess we can go ahead and make it as easy as possible by creating a media player with all the scripting in it. Jonathan mentioned preloaders, we use a smart buffer test which times the download of a part of the file and then sets buffer time accordingly. This allows fast start playback, is that what mx and flix will be using as well or will it just be preloaded?


Whiterabbit, I was referring to the initial file size (5,50), but maybe that's not possible. I think there are two final sizes to consider though - less than a MB and whatever maximum we can possibly achieve (just to test the limit and test sound sync issues).


Okay, yeah lets keep it small. I got a feeling this could be downloaded enough times to break the bank. I have noticed all systems have sound synch issues so thats a good one, and Gweedo mentioned a frame limitation for segments which is good because Flash is extremely ram hungry so even though the technical limitation is 16000 frames, I doubt a machine exists that can handle that.


BTW Jonathan, I've responded to your message - but have yet to hear back from you.

5G
[Edited by Wheels on 08-18-2002 at 04:23 AM] [/B][/QUOTE]

[flashants]

Originally posted by whiterabbit
If the swf video guys (flix, at least but maybe also swideo.com, livetronix.com, vid2swf, flashants.com, turbine and whatever others) are in, then I can see about getting some of the guidelines used in the traditional streaming codecs and we can all contribute as to which guidelines can apply or add new parameters as needed and we can even take it a step further and include the dv codec comparison results from streamingmedia.com.Yes, we would like to join the comparison.
In fact, Flashants flash video solution(FMProjector/FMPlayer) is not simulated video. We support all WMP supported media and enable flash to embed video in projector and website.
We are willing to provide assistance and information for the comparison.
http://www.flashants.com

[jdiogo]

We at Blue Pacific Software would like to participate on this encoding comparison with Turbine Video Encoder.
Although it doesn't yet create Flash MX video, TVE is a pretty good Flash 3-5 encoder (it features inter-frame compression and other advanced compression techniques) and we're quite curious on how well it stacks against other popular products.

[whiterabbit]

Great looks like things are shaping up.

I found one of the control clips that was used in streaming media.coms codec comparison. This one is a Digital animation its in AVI format around 400MB. We should get one more that is not an animation and then we are set.

[Jonathan_B]

I think we should have a lot more than two clips and I think they should be selected by a disinterested third party.
Clips should have a variety of typical video scenarios (animated video is not really a typical scenario, since most people doing animation in Flash are starting in Flash, not converting into Flash). Typical scenarios are dramatic scenes, trailers, action/sports, talking heads, etc.

Also, Whiterabbit I'm still trying to find out how I can test out your service, how long it takes, and how much it costs. Can you please provide that information.

jb
http://www.wildform.com

[markapicone]

I have a question about using video and Flash for CD-ROM distribution. I have a customer that wants a Flash presentation with video included. I'm considering using Flix for the video assetts. Obviously instead of exporting to a .swf I create a projector and burn to CD, will I have any problems with cross-platform issues? Will I need a prompt in the beginning of the presentation for the user to check for the Flash plug-in?
I'm accustomed to creating Flash-based web sites. CD-ROM with video is a bit intimidating right now.

Thanks for any input.

MP

[Jonathan_B]

Hi.
I'll answer you briefly here, and if you want more information email me off list. We have done several CD projects and I can share my experiences with you.

You can use Flash video for CDs. However, there are issues to consider.
Because of the way Flash works, when you have a SWF on CD, the Flash player loads the entire file into memory before it starts to play. So, depending on your computer's speed, ram, CD player speed, etc. your performance may vary. Consequently, we suggest not creating files larger than 25MB for use on a CD Rom. You can get around this limit by chaining your video swf's and loading them sequentially. Our software, Flix Pro, can do this for you automatically.
Also, if you're going to make Mac projectors, you need to allocate enough RAM to your projector. When preparing a CD-ROM, the projector file needs to be allocated it's own size plus the biggest Flix file plus a couple of extra MB to be on the safe side. When the HFS volume is burnt onto CD it will inherit the memory settings you've specified.

If you create a projector the end user does not need the Flash player - or any other player. Windows and Macs use different projectors. Both the windows and mac versions of Flix will output both win and mac projectors. However, to play the mac projector created by the win version of Flix, you will need to expand the projector on a mac first.

Creating cross-platform CDs is tricky. Here is a thread with more information on that:
cross-platform CDs
http://www.actionscripts.org/forums/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=14844
And here is a site that might be useful for you as well.
http://www.vcdhelp.com

jb@wildform.com

[whiterabbit]

Originally posted by Jonathan_B
I think we should have a lot more than two clips and I think they should be selected by a disinterested third party.
Clips should have a variety of typical video scenarios (animated video is not really a typical scenario, since most people doing animation in Flash are starting in Flash, not converting into Flash). Typical scenarios are dramatic scenes, trailers, action/sports, talking heads, etc.

Also, Whiterabbit I'm still trying to find out how I can test out your service, how long it takes, and how much it costs. Can you please provide that information.

jb
http://www.wildform.com

The video clip??, this is 3D digital animation (not Flash), looks like video and presents very good challenges. It was not selected by me it was selected by streamingmedia magazine for their codec comparison in which I was invited to demonstrate SV's capability.

Test out my service??? This question seems to keep popping up from you even though I have answered it already in this thread. Do you really want an answer or are you trying to make people think SV is only for complex custom scenarios?

For your information, people purchase our book/software on a daily basis both from our site and from Amazon.com (isbn# 0-9716474-0-2, its fully automated help yourself. We dont give out free demo's because we dont care if you buy or not. Our income is mainly derived from us using our product...how does that saying go...

Practice What You Preach?

Here is an idea, I choose this clip, its already been used by one of the top streaming industry magazines for their codec comparison, now you pick the next one, what could be more fair? NO?

[Jonathan_B]

Whiterabbit,
You wrote: "Our income is mainly derived from us using our product"
So my question to you is, if I wanted to hire you to use your book to create your custom SV for me, how much would it cost and how long would it take?

jb

[whiterabbit]

Originally posted by Jonathan_B
Whiterabbit,
You wrote: "Our income is mainly derived from us using our product"
So my question to you is, if I wanted to hire you to use your book to create your custom SV for me, how much would it cost and how long would it take?

jb

We used to specify a 24 hour turn around. Prices started at $50 for a movie trailer. It takes about 15-20 minutes to do a movie trailer. Now we have grown, we usually turn down outside encoding work as we are filming most the time and encoding for our own clients.

Example: For the next 5-6 days we are filming Boxing, Kickboxing, Yoga, Wrestling etc for South Florida Boxing. The clips will be encoded by us as on-demand Flash simulated video and streamed from their web site which we are in the process of building as well. Clips will last between 2-3 minutes each.

What do we charge to film, $500-$5000 per day for mini-dv and DV, it depends, but thats production costs not encoding. For this job its all been rolled up into a lump sum including site construction so I dont have a breakdown of what the actual encoding estimate is.

JP.

[secondsign]

great what you guys are tryna do, think you will be doing us all a great service. only one question so far -

is avi very standard for people encoding?
i guess it must be for the pc, but i dont think many mac
users would ever start encoding from an .avi file?

also, just as a note, i read alot of the video related
posts, and there seems to b repeated *****'n btween some kids re: their products. i aint naming names, but often as a reader, it gets kinda tedious tryna see past the ego to find the info, maybe its just the nature of the business. no personal offence intend. and i do think that this idea is great, and way to try and tacking that issue professionally.
thanks
ss

[Wheels]

Well, the fact that we've got everybody here ready to duke it out for the benefit off all is what I was after in the first place.

The reason I started this thread with the caveat is directly related to my experience in the Projector forum. Every time someone had a question about how to do something difficult (usually making a Mac autostart CD) some software rep would pipe in with the solution before anyone else could lend advice - "buy their software and all your headaches will go away!" The moderators try to keep it in check, but what 'cha gonna do? These guys are on the boards constantly.

In the projector experience, I ended up buying Toast Titanium and figuring it out for myself. I must have done something right, because the guy at the Mpls's biggest dup house said he had given up and was still using Toast 3! I showed him how I did it and I posted my method for creating a Flash/Audio CD on the Mac FAQ (if your interested). http://board.flashkit.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=231315

This is our forum to share experience and help each other save time and duplicated effort, not to promote software as a solution. We just have to keep everyone in check. So far, so good.

5G
[Edited by Wheels on 08-21-2002 at 11:02 PM]

[whiterabbit]

Originally posted by secondsign
great what you guys are tryna do, think you will be doing us all a great service. only one question so far -

is avi very standard for people encoding?
i guess it must be for the pc, but i dont think many mac
users would ever start encoding from an .avi file?

also, just as a note, i read alot of the video related
posts, and there seems to b repeated *****'n btween some kids re: their products. i aint naming names, but often as a reader, it gets kinda tedious tryna see past the ego to find the info, maybe its just the nature of the business. no personal offence intend. and i do think that this idea is great, and way to try and tacking that issue professionally.
thanks
ss

Hey secondsign,

Im on Mac too. I cant remember how I came by it. maybe it comes with the newer quicitime but I have the avi to qt utility. At least as many people are working with .avi's (PC's version of the .mov) so might as well be able to handle both formats.

As for the video comparison. Lets hope it leads to a clearer understanding of all the options and considerations for streaming video involving Flash.

[Wheels]

I have a suggestion for the sample clip. The new Lord of the rings trailer is up on the QuickTime site and low and behold - they are encouraging downloads in three size formats and have the files packaged in both .sit and .zip. Sounds like we have a good candidate and a free host.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/newline/the_two_towers/

So far my experience with Sorenson MX has proved that video already compressed with Sorenson 3 (like the trailers) is just as good as starting with a huge uncompressed file. One nice thing about the trailers, is that the sound is at 44.1kHz 16? or 32 stereo - so we have a good sound track to start with as well.

What do you all think? Any objections?

I've been in touch with John (the main mod here at Flashkit) and have requested a sticky FAQ and a sticky test thread for our little experiment.

5G

[whiterabbit]

The higher the quality the source the more you can get away with (double compressing). For the web its usually not a big deal and I think its only important that we start from the same source.

This dark and misty type scenery always breaks down pretty fast. Its already got alot of noise in it but like I said as long as we start from the same source, Im okay with it.

I downloaded the full screen version and the medium version. maybe I will check out the large version too. Really wish we could start with some better source so we could also compare (just in a passing way to the existing trailers).

Also I was not able to open the audio, they might have it protected or my software might not be current enough, any ideas.

Cant wait to see the movie, last one was great.

cheers

JP

[Wheels]

I think it would make sense to have another source that is basically raw, but I think the fast action and dark colors of the Rings movie will make for a good test.

I didn't take a look at the sound track, but they usually use QSound? .mp3 on the trailers. I ran it through Spark Pro and had no problems. May be a case of not having the codec on any of your machine, but then again - if you have QT you should be alright.

I believe the only difference between the full screen and large is the QT full skin, otherwise the screen size is the same. Probably just as well for us to use the large format for testing, the Full screen will have image tracks and sprites that we don't want. Ah, that may be the problem - probably a sound track with a control sprite, that would be a seperate layer in QT.

BTW Jorge, I recieved your CD today. I hope to get some time later this week to try it out. We did a bunch of testing with Squeeze over the weekend, can't wait to try Manta.

[whiterabbit]

Hey again,

okay sounds good, I wanted to invite the DV community to check this out and I dont want to have to make the excuse that we started with already compressed footage, you would be surprised how attuned to detail those guys are.

I might need somebody to send me an aif if I cant get it open. As soon as I can get around to it I am going to start laying out a summary of all the pros and cons to SV as per my experience.

Is the Digital animation disqualified then? Its about a 400MB file but I can burn it on cd and send it to whoever is encoding.
-----------------------------

On a different tune: Apparently interest in Flash video is surging. Alot of people have been asking me about automated features- pre loaders, media players with SV. To answer that -

Just like the downloadable movies and tutorials here on Flash kit you can create templates to use over and over. We have a few templates we include but our software has very little to do with automated solutions. It just makes it possible for the Flash Player to play back without bogging down the computer through ram consumption.

I just installed a Flash SV media player with typical controls that ties into php/mysql backend. All the video info is stored in the database...such as file size play time pre-load etc (the variables to calculate buffer time) as well as the video name. Now when ever a new video is added all we have to do is plug in those values via a browser interface. The links are generated automatically and the video loads dynamically into a template media player along with whatever other variables you want.

It took very little code to do this and I dont consider myself an expert programer or action scripter.

I hope that will answer some questions and if you emailed me and I didnt get back, sorry we are really swamped right now and I get about 200 emails every day.

Onward Ho!

[Jonathan_B]

Perhaps we should find other sources as well in other formats such as Mpeg, Windows Media, Mpeg4 AVIs, etc. People are using all types of video on the web, so we should make the test representative.

jb
http://www.wildform.com

[mudgy]

Originally posted by Jonathan_B
Consequently, we suggest not creating files larger than 25MB for use on a CD Rom.

Why the limit? Is this just a Mac issue?

[whiterabbit]

Whats happening with the codec comparison?

Streaming media magazine has told me they will feature the results.

[Jonathan_B]

Mudgy wrote: "Why the limit? Is this just a Mac issue?"

No, it's not just a Mac issue. It's a Flash issue. Because of the way Flash works, when you have a SWF on CD, the Flash player loads the entire file into memory before it starts to play. So, depending on your computer's speed, ram, CD player speed, etc. your performance may vary.

jb
http://www.wildform.com/flix

[Wheels]

Originally posted by whiterabbit
Whats happening with the codec comparison?

Streaming media magazine has told me they will feature the results.




Well my original proposal was to merely compare the different conversion programs using a couple of test files - Sorenson, Manta, Swideo, and Flix as well as any others.

The comparisons of codecs specifically was proposed by you Jorge. I don't have the technical expertise to construct or conduct such a test as I am merely a Flash technician. I suggest that if you would like to go forward with the test that those who are interested and qualified take up the task. I will lend any support that I can as a moderator of this forum.

I would still like to see a software comparison.

5G

[mudgy]

We have been working extensively with Video in Flash MX.

I'm a 'bit lost as to the comparison test you want to conduct here. As I read it, you want to use the Lord of the Rings trailer as a test video. Then you want to imbed it into Flash, natively. Is that correct?

Then post our best compression version here for comparison along with how it was done?

[whiterabbit]

Okay, I will go ahead and set up an independent comparison on my site along with a faq and if anybody thinks they can do better we can substitute that version over mine. That should be pretty fair.

If I am going to have to do it the focus is going to be on quality and file size like every other codec comparison thats ever been done. People who are more interested in automated solutions can listen to the propaganda of each software dealer, if your encoding video for a client thats all that is going to matter to them anyway.

Once I am done I will post the link, otherwise this thing is not going to get done and I really want to see myself what the outcome is going to be.

Cheers,

Jorge
Manta Productions.com, inc.

[whiterabbit]

Originally posted by mudgy
We have been working extensively with Video in Flash MX.

I'm a 'bit lost as to the comparison test you want to conduct here. As I read it, you want to use the Lord of the Rings trailer as a test video. Then you want to imbed it into Flash, natively. Is that correct?

Then post our best compression version here for comparison along with how it was done?




Perhaps you would like to encode the LOTR in MX version then? The video would be viewable with flash player 6 thats the only requirement.

[mudgy]

Sure...

So... best video and audio at smallest file size. Video size 480x210.

We're on it.

[whiterabbit]

Cool,

mudgy can I send you a CD with some uncompressed footage of another video (3D effect video) as well. We have no problem working with the LOTR but I want to see results of video where we are working with just lightly compressed source as well, (its a 400MB file play time is about 2 min).

let me know where to send it if thats cool with you. You can also contact me off list at jorge@mantaproductions.com

[Jonathan_B]

I went to download the Lord of the Rings trailer, but there were a couple of issues: 1. the audio is protected Quicktime audio and won't convert, 2. the video is presented in a matte with LOTR banners on top and bottom.

Perhaps we need to select other video(s). Using unauthorized film studios copyrighted material is also not necessarily the best way to set up a test.

jb
http://www.wildform.com

[mudgy]

Hey guys....

I had no problem working with the QT file. I used the large video (480x210), not the full screen. Of course there is the issue with double compression, but it still looks really good. So far I have it down to 6M. Still working on it.

[Wheels]

Originally posted by Jonathan_B
the video is presented in a matte with LOTR banners on top and bottom.


Jonathon, what is "matte with LOTR"? Did you download the Full screen or Large?

I didn't have any problems converting the audio, if you used the full screen, it may have been compiled in Live Stage Pro.

I think we should take your comment on the copyrighted material into consideration, although I don't feel it's much of an issue since we are only using it to test and not to redistribute and is sure is a handy way to get everyone involved. I don't know, anyone else have on opinion?

I don't think the double compression is much of an issue, I've seen no difference in quality between precompressed and raw. It could be an issue with some software I guess, it would be good to test both. As a developer, I often recieve files exported from After Effects, or Sorenson 3 QT .mov's via FTP. It's just easier to transfer smaller files - so it often comes down to precompressed. I'm sure this is an issue for many developers.

So I'll round up the testing on the Flash to video software side, I can currently provide testing with Sorenson Spark Pro, Manta, and Flix. Here's the start of a list, can anyone think of other's we should be including:

Flash to video software solutions:

1. Flix: http://www.wildform.com
2. Sorenson MX (Spark Pro): http://www.sorenson.com
3. Swideo: http://www.swideo.com
4. Manta Producions: http://www.mantaproductions.com/
5. Flash MX (Spark): http://www.macromedia.com

We'll need a standardized log sheet for the settings and such. PDF anyone?

I've talked to John about a sticky FAQ and another sticky thread for the video test. It's on the way. Maybe we need another for the Codec test. Either way, we'll get a couple of new threads going and put this one to rest.

5G

[gweedo]

I received the following in an email from Sorenson:

Sorenson Media is pleased to announce the official release of the Sorenson Squeeze 2.02 update for both Mac and Windows.

Current owners of any version (except the trial) of Sorenson Squeeze are entitled to this free update by downloading it from our Web site. The update can be found in the Support/Download section of the Web site and does require you to register on the site before downloading the update. There is no cost to register.

This update does require that you have a purchased version of Squeeze 2.0 already installed on your system.

Some of the new features of Squeeze 2.02 include:

- Stitching support for SWF file export (available only with Sorenson Squeeze for Macromedia Flash MX)
- Support for Microsoft AVI source files
- Improved DV Capture
- Improved video filter preview
- Keyframe interval control

Download free Squeeze 2.02 upgrade
http://www.sorenson.com/content.php?cats=5/17


Not sure if they fixed the 2055 frame limitation, though.

I think it was decided in this thread that the product/process comparison would focus on quality of compression, rather than product features (which appear to comprise the bulk of this upgrade), but for the sake of this test it would probably be best to use the the most current version of each product.

Tried to finagle some test video for the cause, but (not unexpectedly) ran into a legal brick wall.

Good luck.

[Wheels]

Hi all,

I'm back. I've been off shooting a documentary from the back of a motorcycle (man am I shot). We documented a ride from Oxford MI to NYC for 9/11. The Detroit Renegades, an outlaw gang of bikers raised $30,000 for the families of Brooklyn's FD unit #2's families and hand delivered the check. 300 bikes, 1000 stills, and hours of video. What an experience.

I posted a few stills for the bikers, if your intersted - http://www.heroesofseptember.net/911/

I'll post some video and the rest of the stills as soon as we get it all edited.

Anyway, I'll start putting together the test over the next couple of weeks. Any updates? Let me know.

5G

[mudgy]

We have completed a version of the LOTR trailer in Flash.

I am out of the office until the 23rd, so I'll post it when I get back in the office. It looks good.

See ya guys then...

[mctc]

I was reading old posts and feel like I've been cheated halfway into a good novel.

Where did the mother-of-all video posts, "Your experience Using Video..." go to. It was to compare compression schemes for flash with "Wheels" moderating a comparison test on the "Lord of the Rings" trailer. It started 8/7 and just dropped off the screen 9/14. Did everyone agree to bail out? I'm very curious as to the results.

[Wheels]

Sorry, it's just been pushed to the back burner. Jonathan and I have both been working on the upcoming Flashkit book. It's still going to happen, just a small delay.

[mudgy]

We have created the Lord of the Rings trailer in MX.

Origianl QT file was over 20M. MX file came in at approximatly 6M with interactivity.

Check it out here (http://www.theauragroup.com/conceptual/lotr)

[mattsavard]

Come on guys...at least all of you compress the lord of the rings video until you can agree on an uncompressed video clip to use. I just read through 7 pages of posts only to find no payoff...I am very eager to see the end result of this... Thanks to the one group who compressed the clip already....now I'd like to see the SV and Flix interpretations.....I have a need for flash-resident video for an upcoming project and would like to pick a product to use with the help of this test.

thanks
matt