Wanted - new Digital Video editing system.

Tim-KTim-K Southwest PA
edited August 2003 in Science & Tech
I've been using Windows Movie Maker 2.0 to edit and encode my webshows so far, and I like it. My only problem is that the .WMV files it creates must have WMP 9.0 to play.

I'd like earlier versions of WMP, like back to 6.4, to play my files with no problems to make it easier for people. Not everyone wants to go and download a special player for one site.

So what editing programs will work for me?

I looked at Helix Producer Basic, but it only outputs Real Player files. No.

Windows Media Encoder may work, but it likes to give me a hard time. And custom setting the bit rates is something I just figured out how to do there. And it's a headache I don't need. :banghead:

Any other ideas?

Comments

  • MediaManMediaMan Powered by loose parts.
    edited July 2003
    If you can hold on a couple of weeks...I'm just beginning a series of articles on that very topic and using Matrox's RTX10 series of cards combined with Adobe Premiere.

    It should have all of your answers. :) Well...most...maybe a good start. lol.
  • Tim-KTim-K Southwest PA
    edited July 2003
    How are the articles going? I'm looking forward to reading them.
  • SpinnerSpinner Birmingham, UK
    edited July 2003
    Tim K said
    ...Not everyone wants to go and download a special player for one site...

    I use Adobe premiere, good piece of kit, but hardly for the novice. However all the vids and stuff I have up on my website, are WMP9 encoded, why? because I do use Movie Maker 2, for quick editing etc etc.

    Like I have done on my site, to save people having to download the whole player to watch the vids, you could simply post a copy of the WMP9 codec which will work with all previous version of WMP. It's only a small file, and I'm sure most people will be quite happy to download and install it.
  • Tim-KTim-K Southwest PA
    edited July 2003
    Can you give me a link to that codec file? I looked for it at microsoft.com and couldn't find it.
  • SpinnerSpinner Birmingham, UK
    edited July 2003
    Sure, I have a copy on my site (like I mentioned). Here's the link: http://www.spinnershomepage.co.uk/Front%20Page%20Downloads/WM9Codecs.exe :)
  • Tim-KTim-K Southwest PA
    edited July 2003
    Okay. Thanks for letting me get it.

    MediaMan - how's the article coming along?
  • CBCB Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Der Millionendorf- Icrontian
    edited August 2003
    I run my university's television station. We use Mac G4's and a program called Final Cut Pro. If you have the money to invest in it, this is the most advanced, AND user freindly digital editing setup that we've ever been able to find.

    We like it much better than the half-million dollar professional editing system that they bought for us several years ago. It takes up a whole room. We let the freshmen use that.

    It's also the only use for a Mac that I've ever found.
  • a2jfreaka2jfreak Houston, TX Member
    edited August 2003
    Never used Final Cut Pro, but I have heard wonderful things about it.

    I don't do enough video editing to justify purchasing a high-end mac, nor forking over the cash for FCP either. Besides, w/ Adobe now focusing soley on Windows, Premier will probably become much more competitive in the future.
  • MediaManMediaMan Powered by loose parts.
    edited August 2003
    Article will be up in 2 days. Sorry for the late reply.

    May even be up tomorrow. :)
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited August 2003
    MediaMan said
    Article will be up in 2 days. Sorry for the late reply.

    May even be up tomorrow. :)

    It's a hell of an article about to go live :)
  • Tim-KTim-K Southwest PA
    edited August 2003
    If I'm reading that article correctly, it says that the quality of the video is affected by the processor speed. In my case, that's a 1.1 Celeron. (Slow POS). and 384 MB of PC100 SDRAM.

    Now, I know that it takes a Celeron 1.1 a longer amount of time to compile a video than it would for a 3.06 P4 HT, but does it really affect the QUALITY of the video also?
  • a2jfreaka2jfreak Houston, TX Member
    edited August 2003
    Processor speed should not affect quality, but one is more likely to use lower quality settings when using a slower machine as the encoding process would be painfully slow.
    Tim K said
    If I'm reading that article correctly, it says that the quality of the video is affected by the processor speed. In my case, that's a 1.1 Celeron. (Slow POS). and 384 MB of PC100 SDRAM.

    Now, I know that it takes a Celeron 1.1 a longer amount of time to compile a video than it would for a 3.06 P4 HT, but does it really affect the QUALITY of the video also?
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited August 2003
    There are still methods of encoding XViD for maximum quality/meg ratio that brings the process to 6.7 frames per second, as opposed to 38 FPS.
  • MediaManMediaMan Powered by loose parts.
    edited August 2003
    In a way you did read that incorrectly. In order to acheive REALTIME play back of video....quality and processor speed are variants of each other.

    In other words:

    The slower the processor means the video will have to be smaller in file size to achieve realtime play black within a non-linear editing program. For argument's sake it is similar to a game. The more detail and larger screen size that is wanted the more horsepower in the processor and video card there needs to be.

    The key word to this statement is "real time" play back. You can have very high quality video in a lesser machine but real time would not be possible. Not in a software only based NLE. WMV is not broadcast quality.

    I hope that clarifies things. :)
Sign In or Register to comment.