Video-mail quality

Verizon touts its 4G network as blazing fast and what not, while the truth is LTE is NOT a 4G technology - It's Verizon's marketing term and the loophole that allows them to use the term is it's Verizon's 4th gen network (for that matter, any carrier is free to use 50G if they wanted) - while providing a laughable service that is absolutely NO WHERE close to what 4G was intended for.
According to ITU spec, True 4G (IMT-Advanced) was spec'd to have a minimum of 1 Gbps stationary speed with at least 100 Mbps mobile speed. What do we get? 3-5 at best.
Anyway, corporations cheat consumers - that's the way it is, and Verizon is no different.
My issue is with the quality of the video sent in a video mail. Yesterday, I sent a video mail from my Verizon 4G phone to another Verizon 4G phone. Both showing 4G signals. First of all, videos done in HD is out of question for sending as a video-mail. You can only use the absolutely low quality qcif / 3gp format which is nothing but a PIXELATED MESS!! It's NO BETTER than the quality of videos in video-mail service from 5 years ago.
Is Verizon going to do something to improve the quality of the video sent through its video-mail service while they tout how the 4G is changing people's lives? Or may be they don't want to "overload" their whimpy network because it might break that thing?
Anyone?

Pamala12
What version of Premiere Elements and on what computer operating system is it running?
What is the bitrate of the source and what is the bitrate in the export settings for Windows Media?
Do the videos have no sound because there is no sound included in the file or are you losing sound in the export?
What is the maximum flle size accepted in your emailing process?
Is something like Dropbox or Google Drive an option for the sending?
ATR

Similar Messages

TV Anywhere poor video capture quality

I have a Celeron 1.7, 20 and 60 gig hd at 7200 rpm, 512M of ram. My capture is of very poor quality. I have used the MSI software and also Virtual Dub. Still poor video capture quality. Anyone tell me what I can do or how to do this right?
geo-ela

If you use a compressing codec in real time, you need lotsa CPU.
Try using a lossless codec such as Huffyuv (you'll need lotsa disk) for the real time capture and then compress afterwards.

Possible to adjust video camera quality settings?

I realize this is a shot in the dark, but is there any way to adjust the video camera quality settings on a 5th-gen nano? I'm wondering if the poor quality of the video is a result of the hardware or the built-in compression settings.

Hello Matt,
is there any way to adjust the video camera quality settings on a 5th-gen nano?
No. What you see is what you get.
Here are the specs for captured video on your nano.
H.264 VGA video, 640 by 480 pixels, up to 30 frames per second with AAC audio
Not exactly top notch, but still decently quality for a decent price. It's more than likely due to both reasons. This may improve with future generations.
B-rock

Two questions: how do Skype and iChat compare for group video? quality, reliability, cost, etc are important. 2) Is my MobileMe ID what I need to use in the window in making an iChat buddy? It only says AIM above the window, online tutorial differs.

Two questions: 1) How do Skype and iChat compare for group video? Quality, reliability, cost, etc are important. 2) Is my MobileMe ID what I need to input in the window in making an iChat buddy? It only says AIM above the window, online tutorial differs, saying MobileMe, AIM, GoogleTalk (Jabber) all work. Thnx

Hi,
IChat uses better Video Compression than Skype does.
On a top flight Mac you can send a 640 X 480 pixel frame up to 30 frames a sec.
Skype can't match this.
iChat in Video is Peer to Peer. (you can actually Log out of the Buddy list)
Skype seems to borrow something from everyone's bandwidth to make connections.
What do you mean by Business account Tracking ?
iChat Adds (or can add) the First Name, Last Name of your Buddies and create an Address Book Entry
Whether you mark those cards connected with a company is up to you.
(I have heard of issues with earlier version of iChat and the Address Book that "saw" the Company Name as the part of the Name and linking several Screen Names to the one name
Audio on a Mac using Skype tend to be the same as the streaming needs are less.
However you have to rely on any PCs audio abilities from PCs which may not be to the same standard.
Mac to PCs in iChat and AIM can be difficult though. (It should work but it rarely as simple as Plug and go)
Skype may suit your needs better on ocassions.
9:11 PM Thursday; May 5, 2011
Please, if posting Logs, do not post any Log info after the line "Binary Images for iChat"
 G4/1GhzDual MDD (Leopard 10.5.8)
 MacBookPro 2Gb( 10.6.7)
, Mac OS X (10.6.7),
"Limit the Logs to the Bits above Binary Images."  No, Seriously

FLASH VIDEO LOSES QUALITY WHEN "WMODE" SET TO TRANSPARENT

I have a flash video beside a roll out menu. When I set the
"wmode" to transparent the video loses quality. Any help would be
appreciated. Thanks.

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010106060209070007020804
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
actually, i can see in that code that you do still have wmode
transparent stuff in there. if you look just a little before
the ending
script tag, you'll see some. and then it's also in one of the
parameter
tags. in fact, you have the wmode=transparent parameter tag,
but not the
one that the instruction i gave you said to put in! actually,
it doesn't
look like you followed the instructions i gave you at all! at
least not
completely.
i think your best bet might be to just delete the video from
the page
(your code is too messed up for me to figure it out, sorry)
and
re-insert it, then follow the instructions on the link i gave
you. but
you need to do EVERYTHING it says to do, all the way until it
says *"2.
Hiding the <select> element:"
* if you start fresh and follow those instructions precisely,
i think it
will work!
just started wrote:
> courtney (n h c) wrote:
> quick question: when you did the stuff in the link i
gave you, did you
> remember to take out any wmode/transparent stuff that
you already put in
> there?
>
> Yes I did take out the wmode/transparent.
>
> This is the code. Thanks.
>
> <script type="text/javascript">
> AC_FL_RunContent(
> 'codebase','
http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#
>
version=8,0,0,0','width','550','height','367','id','FLVPlayer','src','FLVPlayer_
>
Progressive','flashvars','&MM_ComponentVersion=1&skinName=Clear_Skin_3&streamNam
>
e=videos/2007_fishing_video&autoPlay=true&autoRewind=true','quality','high','sca
>
le','noscale','name','FLVPlayer','salign','lt','pluginspage','
http://www.macrome
>
dia.com/go/getflashplayer','movie','FLVPlayer_Progressive','wmode','transparent'
> ); //end AC code
> </script><noscript><object
> classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000"
> codebase="
http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#ve
> rsion=8,0,0,0" width="550" height="367"
id="FLVPlayer">
> <param name="movie" value="FLVPlayer_Progressive.swf"
/>
> <param name="salign" value="lt" />
> <param name="quality" value="high" />
> <param name="scale" value="noscale" />
> <param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
> <param name="FlashVars"
>
>
value="&MM_ComponentVersion=1&skinName=Clear_Skin_3&streamName=videos/2007_fishi
> ng_video&autoPlay=true&autoRewind=true" />
> <embed src="FLVPlayer_Progressive.swf" wmode="opaque"
width="550"
> height="367" quality="high"
> pluginspage="
http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"
> type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed>
>
flashvars="&MM_ComponentVersion=1&skinName=Clear_Skin_3&streamName=videos/2007_f
> ishing_video&autoPlay=true&autoRewind=true"
quality="high" scale="noscale"
> width="550" height="367" name="FLVPlayer" salign="LT"
> type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
> pluginspage="
http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"
/>
> </object>
> </noscript>
>
>
--------------010106060209070007020804
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01
Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
actually, i can see in that code that you do still have wmode
transparent stuff in there. if you look just a little before
the ending
script tag, you'll see some. and then it's also in one of the
parameter
tags. in fact, you have the wmode=transparent parameter tag,
but not
the one that the instruction i gave you said to put in!
actually, it
doesn't look like you followed the instructions i gave you at
all! at
least not completely.<br>
<br>
i think your best bet might be to just delete the
video from the page
(your code is too messed up for me to figure it out, sorry)
and
re-insert it, then follow the instructions on the link i gave
you. but
you need to do EVERYTHING it says to do, all the way until it
says <strong>"2.
Hiding the <select> element:"<br>
<br>
</strong> if you start fresh and follow those
instructions precisely, i
think it will work!<br>
<br>
just started wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:[email protected]"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">courtney (n h c) wrote:
quick question: when you did the stuff in the link i gave
you, did you
remember to take out any wmode/transparent stuff that you
already put in
there?
Yes I did take out the wmode/transparent.
This is the code. Thanks.
<script type="text/javascript">
AC_FL_RunContent(
'codebase','<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="
http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#">http://download.macr omedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#</a>
version=8,0,0,0','width','550','height','367','id','FLVPlayer','src','FLVPlayer_
Progressive','flashvars','&MM_ComponentVersion=1&skinName=Clear_Skin_3&streamN am
e=videos/2007_fishing_video&autoPlay=true&autoRewind=true','quality','high','sca
le','noscale','name','FLVPlayer','salign','lt','pluginspage','<a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="
http://www.macrome">http://www.macrome</a>
dia.com/go/getflashplayer','movie','FLVPlayer_Progressive','wmode','transparent'
); //end AC code
</script><noscript><object
classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000"
codebase=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="
http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=8,0,0,0">"http ://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#ve
rsion=8,0,0,0"</a> width="550" height="367"
id="FLVPlayer">
<param name="movie" value="FLVPlayer_Progressive.swf"
/>
<param name="salign" value="lt" />
<param name="quality" value="high" />
<param name="scale" value="noscale" />
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
<param name="FlashVars"
value="&MM_ComponentVersion=1&skinName=Clear_Skin_3&streamName=videos/2007_fi shi
ng_video&autoPlay=true&autoRewind=true"
/>
<embed src="FLVPlayer_Progressive.swf" wmode="opaque"
width="550"
height="367" quality="high"
pluginspage=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="
http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer">"http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" </a>
type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed>
flashvars="&MM_ComponentVersion=1&skinName=Clear_Skin_3&streamName=videos/200 7_f
ishing_video&autoPlay=true&autoRewind=true"
quality="high" scale="noscale"
width="550" height="367" name="FLVPlayer" salign="LT"
type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
pluginspage=<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="
http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer">"http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" </a>
/>
</object>
</noscript>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--------------010106060209070007020804--

IChat Video Conference Quality?

Hello,
I am thinking about purchasing a Macbook and using it for one-on-one video conferencing, but would like to know if the webcam video quality is really as good as it is in the store demo. That is, when you video conference with others (Mac and PC), is the video you receive sharp, or is it blocky (more like big pixels) and response slow even with a cable modem? I am asking because we also have a new Sony Vaio and the webcam quality is pretty poor with video conferencing using AIM, Sightspeed, and Windows Live Messenger. While at the Apple store the salesperson was not able to connect to anyone outside of the store, so I was not able to gauge the quality. Also, are you able to make the video window larger? (it seems so small)
Thanks for any feedback…
Windows XP Pro

The primary determinant of iChat video conferencing quality is the upstream Internet connection speed on both ends of the call.
But for a given connection speed such as yours (whatever it is), I'd say that Mac to Mac iChat video conferencing would be clearly better than PC video conferencing on AIM, SightSpeed, or Windows Live Messenger. It's not going to be as good as what you saw in the Apple Store unless you have an upstream connection speed of 1500 Kbps or greater.
I have both Macs and PCs, but I always choose to use iChat Mac to Mac video conferencing whenever possible. As a Mac alternative to iChat, I prefer Skype for Mac with video and recommend it for Mac users who need to video-connect with PC users.
Both iChat and Skype offer up to full-screen video.

Cannot open video mail

This is regarding an old post that hasn't been answered:
http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=9883233#9883233
Basically I cannot upload videos sent from a Sprint PCS mobile to my email account because Windows technology is required. I am aware of the virtual box and bootcamp but I would much prefer a Mac only solution...Perhaps someone has written a script or knows a workaround?
Any help appreciated even if that means redirecting me to another section of this forum, but in this case, which one exactly?

frangipane wrote:
You misread my posts which says:
"I am aware of the virtual box and bootcamp but I would much prefer a Mac only solution...Perhaps someone has written a script or knows a workaround?"
I didn't misread your post. You stated that "... it's a fact I have verified myself and it is known problem to both Sprint PCS and Apple" and "The bottom like is I cannot open Video mail send by a sprint PCS mobile because it requires Windows technology." You also stated "I would much prefer a Mac only solution...Perhaps someone has written a script or knows a workaround?" To me this clearly states that (a) it can't be done any other way and (b) you would like to do it another way.
The bottom like is I cannot open Video mail send by a sprint PCS mobile because it requires Windows technology.
Since you refuse to provide details about the required "Windows technology", I can only guess that perhaps it's an issue regarding WMV files. If that's the case, you should investigate Flip4Mac WMV: http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/28842 .
If that's not the problem, you could increase the chances that someone could help you by supplying details of the required "Windows technology".

Had some old movies from reel to reel on a vcr. i converted these to mp4 format using pinnacle video capture, quality was not great but it was decent enough on my computer. when i placed these on my ipad it was much worse and very choppy. i have handbra

had some old movies from reel to reel on a vcr. i converted these to mp4 format using pinnacle video capture, quality was not great but it was decent enough on my computer. when i placed these on my ipad it was much worse and very choppy. i have handbrake and thought i could maybe change the movie so i could play it on ipad but dont know what dimensions or framerate etc. currently the movie on the computer is in 640 x 480 mpeg 4 aac. thanks derek

Jon,
What Julianne said at first about re-linking made perfect sense and I followed it easily, had actually already been there. But in my situation now, it didn't have any effect. The directory of folders which had already been added were still just as they were, and the outstanding balance are not in the desired position. And the folders which had been brought in earlier today when I clicked "synchronize folder", were still missing all the metadata.
Maybe this means I need to start over, and I'm fine about doing that that, but I don't know what it takes to accomplish that. I'm concerned now that any changes I make out of guesswork could only make the problem harder to resolve. It just feels to me like something I did at the beginning just wasn't right, and now it's a tangle.
Can you advise?
Thanks,
Gary

Poor video recording quality with Presenter 9

I'm trialling Presenter 9 and Captivate 7.
I have a Compaq CQ61-320SA latop with a 2.2 Ghz dual core processor and 8 Gb RAM. It's 3 or 4 years old. The Display Adaptor entry in Device Manager says it has Mobile Intel 4 Series Express Chipset Family (Microsoft) and the driver is up to date. (I should say that HP's product spec page for my laptop says that 'Video Graphics - NVIDIA GeForce 8200M G which confuses me as Device manager is listing it as Mobile Intel 4 Series Express Chipset Family?)
When I record full screen in Presenter (it seems you are restricted to full screen recording in Presenter, unlike in Captivate), the resulting MP4 is rendered in high quality. The fonts in the video look nice and sharp. However, if I import the video into Powerpoint with the Adobe Presenter add in and then publish it to a folder on my PC with the 'lossless' setting and then click on the file 'index.html' the playback quality in my browser (Internet Explorer 11) is much lower. The fonts look 'blocky'.
I don't think it can be PC specification because if I record full screen in Captivate 7 and import the MP4 file into a new project and publish it, the quality of the published slide is great. (Again, I click on the 'index.html' file to play the published video).
Does this mean that Presenter is not as good as Captivate in terms of its video recording quality? Are the encoding engines different?
I love the webcam PIP functionality and simplicity of Presenter but the seemingly low video quality versus Captivate is an issue for me.
Any ideas/thoughts would be appreciated.
Peter

After playing with Presenter more, I've come to the conclusion that the degradation in quality from the original MP4 video file (that Presenter generates with its video creator tool) to the reduced quality after importing the MP4 into PowerPoint and publishing the course to HTML is probably due to a scaling issue. I've read elsewhere on this forum and on the Camtasia forum that whenever you re-scale a video, you lose clarity. The fact is that Presenter only allows recording of the entitre screen. When you import a full screen recording into a PowerPoint slide, because the slide itself is of a size lower than full screen, the original full screen dimension in the video is scaled down.
I'm thinking that the higher specification graphics card in the new laptop I talked about in the previous post produces a higher quality MP4 video in the first place so that the effect of the scaling down when imported into PowerPoint is more acceptable.
Any comments?
Peter

Video mail

IPad 2 model MC706LL/A (WIFI but no phone), 32GB with 14 available, running iOS 8.1.1 (12B435).
Got interested in "eyejot". Looked like it would work on ipad AND desktop. Though ad said it was available in the App Store... it wasn't when I accessed it from the icon on my tablet. However, when I accessed the product website here (http://blog.eyejot.com/about) I get an ad that looks old and makes me suspect. Is this a reliable product that works well and is it really for sale in the App Store? If so... any idea why my icon that takes me to the App Store reports "No results for 'eyejot'"?

As far as I remember, the 6680 has no built-in "Video Mail" application/support (it has MMS and support for 3G video calls).
Sounds like you're talking of some sort of operator service. It might help, if you stated which operator and in which country (or called their customer service and asked them directly).

Hardware to Maximize Skype Video Call Quality

Looking to build two Windows desktop computers solely to Skype between them. Both machines will have Internet at 20 Mbps up and down, and two-to-three selectable (one-at-a-time) webcams per machine. Want to absolutely maximize video call quality; audio and overall cost are less important. What specifications for the motherboards/cards/webcams would you suggest? Suggestions of brand and model are acceptable, but detailed specifications are more important. Replies very much appreciated.

I answered a similar question to this in the past, so you may find this thread helpful:
http://community.skype.com/t5/Hardware/Buying-Computer-for-Skype/m-p/1662779/highlight/true#M4076
Do understand that unless you have something managing the feed for multiple webcams/video feeds prior to coming into your machine, the load will be put on your processor. Webcams can be very resource demanding. If you chose to run multiple versions of Skype that may be as well. I wouldn't expect 1080p or in some cases HD video in scenarios where you may be taxing even a very fast processor. Since there can be many variables it's hard to say what will work in your scenario.

Retrieve what video resolutions(quality) a youtube video has, with youtube api or packet analysis

a youtube video is usually with multiple video resolutions (quality) like 240p, 360p,720p,etc how can I retrieve what video resolutions(quality) a youtube video has are there any youtube api which can get this information
I think If I capture the packets when I'm watching a video, by analysing the packets, definitely I can know what resolution this video provides but I don't know which part the packet provide this information does anyone know this? thanks!

I am no iPhone expert, but I believe it has to do with what connection you are using.
I noticed this the other day, I watched a YouTube vid the other day connected to my home wifi, and it looked amazing. Then I went to show a co-worker the same vid while on the 3g network. It looked like crap, all large pixels and blury. Anyway that is what I noticed.

IPad 2 Video playback Quality Issue (Low Contrast and grayish black)

Does anyone notice that the video playback quality is really bad on the iPad 2? If you try to play any video (youtube, apple trailer, your own converted video) on the iPad 2, any black images will turn grayish... Just put your iPhone, iPod touch, or even the older iPad next to it, then you will notice a BIG difference. The color is similar to what happened when you set the gamma incorrectly on a display.
Also, you will notice this more if you change the orientation of the device, the contrast will be corrected for a fraction of a second.
I've tried this on other iPad 2 and they all share the same problem. I tried to talk to the Apple Genius Bar and they refused to give me a proper answer on this, instead simply claiming that is just the way it is... I wanted to refund this but I've passed the 14 days rule and also I got it from a authorized retailer and so Apple just won't take it back.
I believe it can be fixed by software... Any idea? or I shall throw it away T_T

I'm on the phone with apple support right now. I work at a post production house, and we/our clients keep having this issue - everything looks great on screen and on the ipad 1, and theres a huge gamma shift on the ipad 2. they need to fix this ASAP. like Jls21 already said, a lot of us use ipads for work purposes - unacceptable!
this thread ( https://discussions.apple.com/message/15100980#15100980 ) seems to blame the h.264 codec/compression settings…? does anyone know of another codec that prevents this gamma shift on the ipad 2?
this is from the tech specs page:
Video formats supported: H.264 video up to 720p, 30 frames per second, Main Profile level 3.1 with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats; MPEG-4 video, up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps per channel, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats; Motion JPEG (M-JPEG) up to 35 Mbps, 1280 by 720 pixels, 30 frames per second, audio in ulaw, PCM stereo audio in .avi file format
is there anything that jumps out to anyone regarding workarounds for this issue?
we've used both Compressor and MPEG Streamclip - there's no quality difference between them, in case anyone is trying that.
okay so, i was transferred to a senior technical rep and he looked it up - apparently apple is getting a bunch of complaints about this issue and they've submitted it to their developers. the more people that call and complain, the higher up on the priority list it goes to be fixed in a software update. there is no workaround known, and it's a standard issue across all ipad 2's.

Video service quality test failed

Very pleased with my broadband speed (ethernet connection), no complaints whatsoever. But have never come across this before - "video service quality test failed". Tried googling it, but came up with nothing but rubbish-speak.
I ran the BT test and this was an option so clicked the box and it ran another test and up popped this message.
. . . it must be remembered that the sea is a great breeder of friendship. Two men who have known each other for twenty years find that twenty days at sea bring them nearer than ever they were before, or else estrange them.
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Thanks to both of you, much appreciated. I`m having a nice glass of pussers rum so I`ll have a tot for you both
. . . it must be remembered that the sea is a great breeder of friendship. Two men who have known each other for twenty years find that twenty days at sea bring them nearer than ever they were before, or else estrange them.

MAXIMUM iPod video output quality.

Because a few have asked me for some specs...
The iPod is designed to play back video files that have square pixels.
DVDs use non-square pixels to fit widescreen images into 720x480 native rez of DVD standard.
When you square the pixels of a 2.35 aspect ratio movie (like "Ep III" for example) you get an image that has a native rez of 720x304(=218,880)pixels, mathmatically speaking, the iPod can play back MPEG-4 at 480x480(=230,400) pixels, cha-ching!
The iPod CAN playback the full VIEWABLE resolution of a widescreen movie. You can "think" of it this way, the black bar pixels are excluded. The iPod does not care how they are arranged as long as the pixel count falls at or below 230,400. The specs of one of my typical files is: MPEG-4 SP 720x304 2-pass VBR 1.4Mbps average bit rate/Stereo 2-pass AAC-LC at 48kHz 160kbps average bit rate. When played back on my PC using the native Nero7 (not iTunes) application that I use for encoding I can also read the subtitle info embedded in the file and I also get chapter marks. You should see the difference between this and the 320x240 H.264 files most everyone else seem to be getting from iTunes purchased files or using some freeware or paid encoders. My files look at least twice as good at less than double the file size, to me that is an accomplishment. Output image quality is most important to me, file size falls where it does Ep III = 1.41Gigs for example.
I have a 60 Gig iPod and am able to carry (approx) 5000 songs AND 45 movies of varying lengths with me when I travel, and the videos are WORTH viewing, they are not just an adequate looking fascimilie of a movie. So if anyone want's to bag on my file size for being bigger than H.264 at 768kbps, too late I beat you to it, again, for me, the image comes first.
I'd love to see what other people are doing.
FJ1

The iPod is designed to play back video files that have square pixels.
DVDs use non-square pixels to fit widescreen images into 720x480 native rez of DVD standard.
I fail to see the relevance of your comment. The DVD (a non-square pixel encoded file container) is made to play on a TV/TV monitor device (which displays non-square pixels). The iPod, like all computer monitors, is a square pixel, non-interlaced device. Most good computer software multimedia applications are intelligent enough to know the difference and display the video information at the correct aspect ratio irrespective of the pixel shape in question.
When you square the pixels of a 2.35 aspect ratio movie (like "Ep III" for example) you get an image that has a native rez of 720x304(=218,880)pixels, mathmatically speaking, the iPod can play back MPEG-4 at 480x480(=230,400) pixels, cha-ching! The iPod CAN playback the full VIEWABLE resolution of a widescreen movie.
While it is true that your file resolution does meet restrictions for both total pixels allowed (218,880 of 230,400) and total number of macro-16 blocks (855 of 900), it is untrue that "The iPod CAN playback the full VIEWABLE resolution of a widescreen movie." What you are actually seeing on the iPod is a "scaled to fit" version of your original data. However, if you plan to view your files on multiple displays (iPod, TV, Computer Monitor), then I whole heartedly endorse with your approach for those devices capable of display at the full resolution.
My files look at least twice as good at less than double the file size, to me that is an accomplishment. Output image quality is most important to me, file size falls where it does Ep III = 1.41Gigs for example.
Believe this statement requires further qualification. Once again, while there is little doubt that your files should look better when displayed on larger display devices (greater resolution quality), the differences become less significant when viewed on the iPod (where greater "per pixel" compression quality becomes more significant when you resolution is scaled to fit the smaller screen).
I have a 60 Gig iPod and am able to carry (approx) 5000 songs AND 45 movies of varying lengths with me when I travel, and the videos are WORTH viewing, they are not just an adequate looking fascimilie of a movie.
"WORTH" is in the eye of the beholder. And since my eyes aren't what they used to be, I have gone the other route. I only have 101 audio files and 391 movies on my 60G iPod which is about 60% full at the current time.
So if anyone want's to bag on my file size for being bigger than H.264 at 768kbps, too late I beat you to it, again, for me, the image comes first.
In these cases one must choose efficiency in terms of time, space, or complexity. I can't fault your choice but merely point out that my priorities are different than yours. At native iPod viewing resolutions I achieve the same quality as you using the H.264 codec at 400 kbps which yields roughly 4MBs/min of source material or approximately 6 hours of program material in the space of your average files.
Hope that answers your E-mail question, Rich.

Video-mail quality

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for