Posts Tagged CODECs
Suggested resolutions and parameters for Video in PowerPoint
Posted by Steve Wylie in Speaker support content, Video and motion graphics on November 4, 2008
When inserting video into PowerPoint, you need to balance between quality and performance. It is common for PowerPoint to perform poorly when trying to play back video files that are too large.
Consider trying the following settings, but you should also experiment depending on the capabilities of your computer:
For high definition video in PowerPoint:
- Windows Media Video High definition (WMV HD)
- 1280×720 (720p) resolution
- 25 or 30 frames per second (try to keep it the same as the source video)
- Approx 5mbps bitrate
For standard definition video in PowerPoint:
- Windows Media Video (WMV)
- 640×480 resolution
- 25 or 30 frames per second (try to keep it the same as the source video)
- Approx 2mbps bitrate
If you are using PowerPoint for Mac, use the same resolution, frame rates, and bit rates as above, but encode your video to QuickTime H.264 instead of Windows Media Video.
Always remember to place your video files in the same directory as the PowerPoint presentation. If you move the PowerPoint file to another computer, you need to move the video files with it, as these are not embedded in the PPT or PPTX file.
View more information about converting video and flash files for use in Microsoft PowerPoint for Windows or Mac.
Insert Video into PowerPoint
Posted by Steve Wylie in Speaker support content, Video and motion graphics on November 4, 2008
PowerPoint can be temperamental when playing back video files. Typically, where I have the choice, I would rather switch to a DVD or videotape and then switch back to the presentation again.
However, for those situations where you do need to insert video into PowerPoint, here are a couple of tips:
Generally speaking, you will achieve the best results if you use Windows Media Video (WMV) files for PowerPoint on Windows, or QuickTime H.264 files for PowerPoint on a Mac. Other QuickTime CODECs are supported on Mac, but H.264 is one of the best around for presentation use.
PowerPoint also supports a select few AVI CODECs (including the popular Video for Windows, or MS DV AVI), however these formats will typically produce files which are too large for a computer to handle seamless playback, especially when inserted in a PowerPoint presentation.
If you need to make the video in your PowerPoint presentation compatible with both Windows and Mac, your best bet is to either create 2 versions of the video – a Windows Media Video (WMV) and a QuickTime H.264 (or another QuickTime CODEC).
There are a couple of essential tools for converting video to work with PowerPoint:
Microsoft Windows Media Encoder (Free): Microsoft’s free Windows Media Encoder will take files from a range of common formats and convert them to Windows Media Video (WMV) format, which is likely to play far better when embedded into PowerPoint.
Swiff Point Player (Free): Swiff Point Player is a free utility that assists in inserting SWF Flash movie files into PowerPoint on Windows. It’s possible to achieve this without this utility, using instructions from Adobe – however this utility greatly simplifies the process.
QuickTime Pro: If you need to convert your files to run on a Mac, or if you have files that aren’t playing correctly in PowerPoint on your Mac, then you can purchase QuickTime Pro for either Windows or Mac and convert your video files to a range of QuickTime formats, including H.264.
Flip4Mac: Offers a range of utilities (at a range of prices) that allows you to play Windows Media Video (WMV) files on a Mac from within QuickTime. Flip4Mac also gives QuickTime the ability to convert files to and from WMV format.
Thomson Grass Valley Procoder: If you have a little more money to spend, and are after a great video converter which will accept and output almost any video CODEC, consider Canopus Procoder.
View more information on ideal resolutions, frame rates, and other parameters for inserting video into PowerPoint.
Define: “High definition”
Posted by Steve Wylie in Video and motion graphics on August 7, 2006
1080i and 720p, 2k and 4k “digital film”, 35mm optical film, and 576p are all bad enough – add to that, the fact that most equipment can’t handle those higher-high-definition formats, so companies like Sony and Panasonic are “modifying” them to create sub-standards which are backwards or forwards compatible – but never quite work that way – CineAlta, ProHD, DVCPro 100, HDV… the list goes on… then you get to ingest, where you have to choose your storage format – MPEG2 HD, uncompressed HD, WMV HD for storage and archive – do you record to hard disk, tape, or flash media? What about data transfer? HDSDI? FireWire? Ethernet?
The industry is in the messy phase of trying to sort through which formats are garbage and which formats are feasible in the long term – add to that the fact that processing power is changing so quickly that a format which was unthinkable 12 months ago is now considered too basic by today’s standards.
I think it’s clear that multi-platform systems are the only path for content development, production, and presentation applications – systems which are, in essence or reality, a PC with multiple codecs which is capable of ingress from a variety of methods or formats, and perform faster-than-real-time encoding to a single format for storage and replay, and can then also export to a variety of formats and using a variety of data transfer methods – let’s face it – it’s time to throw out your VTRs and buy PCs.
Intraframe vs. interframe
Posted by Steve Wylie in Video and motion graphics on March 21, 2006
Video compression formats use various techniques to reduce bit rate or overall size of a file. One effecting factor is the use of either interframe or intraframe compression. The two techniques differ in the way one frame relates to the next.
Put simply, interframe compression compiles each frame discreetly – imagine a single JPEG (or similar) image representing each frame – perhaps 15, 25 or even 30 per second.
A more bit-friendly technique is to employ intraframe compression, which compares the differences from one frame to the next, and saves bandwidth by only processing significant changes in particular pixels.
For instance, an intraframe compression technique applied to a talking head against a static background will redraw the region of video that contains the head, but will not redraw the static background.
In some formats, keyframes are employed, where, at specified intervals, the complete frame will be redrawn, and the following frames are compared to the previous keyframe – this technique is a combined inter- and intraframe technique, and is a good compromise between the low bandwidth of intraframe and the higher definition of interframe.
It is important to note that compression codecs that utilize intraframe compression, such as H.264, will commonly require higher levels of processing power to calculate the data which specifies differences in specific pixels from one frame to the next, rather than simply redrawing an entire frame each time.
Low Definition video
Posted by Steve Wylie in Online presentations, Video and motion graphics on March 20, 2006
High Definition (HD) video is taking its place in our TV broadcasts, and soon our DVD formats. Standard Definition will still be around for plenty of time due to our love for watching historical and archived material (and networks that save money running repeats).
But until Internet bandwidth demands catch up to the requirements of high quality video, we’ll have to get used to Low Definition video. Interestingly, most web video these days is equal or better quality to the VCDs we produced in yesteryear when it was too impossible to produce our own DVDs.
HD 1920×1080, 1280×720
SD 768×576, 720×480
LD 320×240
Web video publishing standards
Posted by Steve Wylie in Online presentations, Video and motion graphics on March 17, 2006
If we’re going to give consumers the choice of format, device, delivery, and medium, then it will soon (if not already) be apparent that we can’t cater for everyone. If I was to download music from BigPond Music and play it on my iPod through my car stereo, my requirements are very different from someone who wants to listen to a podcast embedded into a weblog without downloading any files.
This is particularly so with video now. You can’t support iPod, PSP, Windows Mobile, embedded web video (e.g. Flash), and HD/SD download, all with high and low bandwidth and all via HTTP, FTP, P2P, etc… What’s more, if you want to apply licensing restrictions to content in all these formats you might as well give up right away.
Basically, we need to change the way we consider distributing video, just as consumers have to change the way they receive video and other web media. We need to distribute one file format, perhaps with varying quality based on bandwidth preferences (it would be great if this could be done at a server level, drawing from one source file), and either require that users employ software to convert the file to their desired format, or again, use server-side technology to transcode it in real-time and deliver it to the user.
So perhaps rather than a “standard video format” that we all seem to be fighting to determine, we should be looking for a protocol for real-time delivery of ANY format.
Flash video codec issues
Posted by Steve Wylie in Online presentations, Video and motion graphics on March 12, 2006
I have been using FLV (Flash video) to publish short video clips to my blog recently. It’s a really user friendly way for viewers to view short clips without having to download plug-ins, load helper applications, or download files and open them in various applications.
There is, however, a down side.
Flash 7 shipped with support for the Sorenson Spark compression codec, while the newer Flash 8 ships with support for Spark, and a newer, far more efficient codec, ON2 VP6. VP6 produces brilliant images in contrast to Spark, and at lower file size to quality ratios; however it’s not supported in older versions of Flash, which many users will still be using.
I’ve also been puzzled lately as a couple of people who I told to download Flash 8 were still unable to view the file (they could hear the audio but not see the video) even after they’d downloaded the new version of Flash player. I’m not entirely sure why this would be the case. Puzzling at this stage.
Above: Screenshot Flash 7 using Sorenson Spark codec
Above: Screenshot Flash 8 using newer ON2 VP6 codec