5041 Views 9 Replies Latest reply: Nov 5, 2010 1:32 AM by Ian R. Brown
My limited experience with Compressor or even compression says you're going to have to really lower the quality before you even get close. I don't know about IMDB, but sites like YouTube and Vimeo won't play Prores, it has to be something like H.264. I would do a few tests with the Quality setting and bit rate. Just play with like a 2 minute section and see what percentage it reduces it by. You can do that by setting in/out points in the preview window.
Hope that helps.
As specific as you feel you were in your post, you did not state what you had tried to export to, or the length of the movie. A 114GB PR422(HQ) file is probably just over an hour, compressing to h.264 at 3.5Mbps or less should keep you below 2GB. For ease of compression and time saving, you should first run thru compressor using your current codec and just change the frame size then compress to h.264. Job chaining in compressor is a nice feature..
Take a look at:
Message was edited by: moto233racer
A 78 minute film could be encoded in FCP with hi-def quality and a file size of around 2GB using the following settings.
Select File>Export>Using QT Conversion.
Click the "Options" button and when the the Options window opens you will see a "Size" button. Click it.
Change Dimensions to 1280x720 and then in the Settings window select:-
Compression Type . . . . H.264
Frame Rate . . . . . . . . . Current
Key Frames . . . . . . . . . Automatic (or the same as your frame rate).
Compressor Quality . . . High
Encoding . . . . . . . . . . Faster encode will give almost the same quality as Best but is twice as fast - your decision!
Data Rate . . . . . . . . . . Restrict to 3000kbps
These settings should give very good quality results fairly quickly, which should play well.
Also click the Audio button and make sure that AAC has been selected.
Test it out with a short 1 minute project to see what the quality and speed of encoding are like.
A word of warning!
The data rate you need to use is directly connected with the movement and action present in the video.
As long as your videos are quite slow moving, people standing around or moving slowly, close ups etc., you can get away with low data rates like I suggested.
However, if your video is very detailed and contains action, such as lots of people walking quickly across the frame or running around, you need at least twice the data rate otherwise the video will look pixellated and display lots of other unpleasant motion artifacts.
There is no single data rate that fits all.
It is a careful balancing act which you have to decide for yourself by trial and error.
A few years ago I made a slideshow using a much lower data rate than the one I suggested, and because the images were still, it looked marvellous.
So I then used the same data rate for someone walking and the video was so unpleasant as to be unwatchable . . . . . it looked just like those horrible images you see when cheap mobile phone videos are shown on the TV news!