Digital Workshop

Until we went to HD we used AVI files for our video and all was well. However, HD AVI is just too large so we went to MP4. Then we noticed that video embedding didn't work and separate files were created for the MP4s. This, of course, makes the stated use of embedding to prevent unauthorized copying of one's video files no longer possible. However, we found a worse problem. For reasons we don't know, Opus changes the files names to digits with leading zeros. These are not random and so if you have more than one Opus file in a directory with video the files are overwritten.

These wreaks havoc with our LMS convention and created serious housekeeping issues. It would be better if the original unique filename were keep or a random filename created if this is necessary for some reason. It would be even better if the files were embedded as with AVI.

Anyone else had this issue or a solution?

Dave

AVI, like MP4 are both simply video containers and therefore it's the codec used to encode the video stream that will determine the level of compression and overall file size.

AVI is able to use both AVC and ASP formats and therefore can create comparative files in size to MP4. You'll need DivX installed to play back this combination using Opus.

http://www.live.interaktiv.co.uk/index. ... Itemid=166

Mack

Haven't tried any compression on AVI in many years...to the point I'd forgotten about those codecs. I remain dubious of being able to compress to a given size with the same quality between AVI and MP4, but will have my staff look into it.

Needing an additional codec (Divx) is an another issue as we'll have to get IT buy in and support. I like to avoid IT involvement in ANYTHING if you know what I mean...

Thanks for the input...
Dave

I think you misunderstand. The same video and audio streams can be placed into a different containers - AVI; MP4; MKV. Therefore, if the video stream is encoded and produces a 20mb file - it will be a 20mb file regardless of whether I use AVI or MP4 as the container. Different containers do offer different functionality - for example - I use MKV when I want a subtitle stream - but they do not affect file size where the same codecs are used.

As for skinning the cat:

If you disable embed video file, the publication will look in the original location for the file - you could simply use a distinct sub-folder and the system publication directory to organise the videos and keep MP4.

Mack

Hmm...maybe I am not being clear.

What I meant was that H264 and related compression schema offer significantly better image quality at a given compression rate than previous ones. What I question is whether a raw AVI file compressed to a 70% AVI will look as good as a raw AVI file compressed to 70% as an mp4.

Yes, they would be the same size but will it look as good? I tend to doubt it...

As to cat skinning, what I want is a monolithic exe. It's having to create directories or keep up with multiple files we are trying to avoid regardless of how it's done.

Dave

No, I think you're just still missing the point . H264 is just a codec and it can be used for the video stream of an AVI as well as your beloved MP4. It might not be the norm or accepted practice but it can be used when your between a rock and a hard place.

Somebody may jump in but as I see it, you can either:

1. Use MP4 and not embed...
2. Use AVI with H264 and install DivX
3. Use a lesser codec like H263 and the SWF container as most people already have Flash installed.

6. Write to DW and ask them to make Opus embed MP4.

Mack

I think we are missing each other in the dark...

I resist new plugs or codecs as Windows is overloaded. Quicktime is one mentioned in another thread today I banned some time ago for the reasons you mentioned. VR pans and hotspots are a neat idea when they work but I've found them spotty and problematic in practice. That being the case, having yet another add in whining "An update is ready to be installed..." on top of Java, Acrobat, Windows, and such is nonsense up with which I shall not put...

Instead of further muddying the waters, I updated myself a bit and found there are a number of newer AVI compression schema that may do the trick, and only one requires the Divx plug. I have my multimedia guy running some tests now to see how efficient they are and whether they truly embed or not. Main issue is to get back to a monolithic exe file with a visually acceptable compression. I don't care if it's mp4 or a trash compactor as long as it does the job and doesn't require any non-standard codecs and meets an arbitrary standard of visual quality (we've a few files with detail we look at to determine that) and can run on a non-powerhouse PC. We've quit trying to stream and use local launch from drives kept updated in the background as streaming requires way too much compression and creates too much latency. It just isn't ready for prime time.

That's the most important thing I got here. Hard to stay up with everything as a generalist but your mention of a newer AVI compression schema put me on the right path...

I'll post if we hit the "sweet spot."

Dave