Posted by Jim on 01/23/08 17:11

"richard" <nospam@myplace.net> wrote in message
news:4796ea18$0$17235$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> We shoot videos on Sony mini-DV (V1 in SD mode or PD170), edit in
> Premiere CS3 and publish to a web site. Most of our production processes
> have been picked up on the job by the various editors who have worked
> here and I'm not sure we're getting the best quality possible. In fact
> I'm sure we're not. Currently we capture in Premiere, output as AVI and
> encode in Windows Media Encoder. We generally encode at about 1000Kbps
> and have fiddled with that, the results are obvious with the tradeoff
> against filesize - I am comparing our product with competitors at similar
> file sizes and ours just look 'murky'. One person came here with the
> quip "AVI stands for Atrocious Video image and we need Sorenson". So can
> someone offer their advice here - is Sorenson a better encoder, and is it
> a plug-in I can get for Premiere? Should we be shooting at 50i or 25p?
> How often should keyframes be scheduled?
>
> Any help appreciated.
>

avis can be anything from compressed as hell crapola divx,xvid,etc to
pristeen picture perfect uncompressed files, so the AVI 'abbreviation' is
totally incorrect. That would be like saying 'car' stands for crap attitude
receptacle. A car is just a vehicle, of which there are hundreds of types.
Same with avi. An avi is just a container of which there are many types.

wmv files at 1000Kbps should be VERY nice looking video, so although there
are other codecs/encoders you could be using instead of wmv's out of WME, my
guess is that you are feeding the encoder murky video to start with or you
have the settings incorrect in WME.

Sorenson is a nice encoder sure.. but it ouputs avis also (along with
others). An encoder is only as good as the person using it.

[Back to original message]