# Reducing a video file, without losing quality



## smooth (Sep 26, 2005)

Hey everyone 

I have a video file right now, that is 640 X 360 pixels, and I need it to be on the web.

That being said, it is a 32 MB file, so it takes a while for it to start playing when you click on the link to see it.

My question is, how can I reduce the size of the video to maybe 320 X 240, or something near that size, without losing sound quality, and video quality? Or, is there something wrong in my code on my website, to where I can make it start playing earlier?

Here is a link to a test page I am working on, you can view the video file by clicking on the guy on the right: IFG Test Site


----------



## linskyjack (Aug 28, 2004)

First of all, the video loads fairly quickly on my broadband connection. If you want to compress it further, you will lose quality. It looks damn good to me.


----------



## smooth (Sep 26, 2005)

Sounds good. 

I know here it seems to load a little slow, but I know that would be expected with a 32 MB file.


----------



## bonk (Sep 8, 2005)

I using broadband also and loads OK and looks OK.....I would leave it as most people now will have cable connection.


----------



## smooth (Sep 26, 2005)

Thanks for all the advice guys. 

Good to hear that it is loading well on other computers. :up:


----------



## MysticEyes (Mar 30, 2002)

It's fine for high bandwidth users, but a low bandwidth version, 320 X 180 in your case, would allow more people to view it.


----------



## smooth (Sep 26, 2005)

I can understand that.

Are there any programs that can reduce the size of the video, without losing the audio quality?


----------



## linskyjack (Aug 28, 2004)

Pretty much any NLE allows you to resize your video and compress it in a variety of ways. I wouldn't waste my time but if you must.


----------



## smooth (Sep 26, 2005)

I think I found a good solution to the problem I was having 

Check out the link and see what you think now. I have it where you can choose low bandwidth or high bandwidth.  I used Windows Movie Maker to bring the size down for the low bandwidth one.


----------



## thecoalman (Mar 6, 2006)

The filesize is determined by the bitrate, lower bitrates will give you lower file sizes but also reduce the quality. Lowering the resolution has no affect..... but a lower resolution using a lower bitrate will produce some very desirable results if your target audience is someone on a slow connection albeit at a smaller size.

That video is WMV which is superb for web video for two reasons, it can produce very small files at very low bitrates and it's compatible with most machines. You can make WMV with either Movie Maker or MS Media Encoder both availble free on MS's site.

You can get it almost to the point where it will stream on a dial-up with some decent quality. Here's an example:

http://www.40lbhead.com/headfiles/albums/video/rockfest2005_empire_wandt_du.wmv

Ideally you want to work with the source video, using the video on the website as a source will not produce the same results as a high quality source. Other thing to note about that video is it's a little choppy and the audio has a "tingy" sound to it. Both are the result of high compression, the choppiness can also be attributed to the fact that the FPS has been reduced to 10 as opposed to the orignal 30... this also reduces filesize.


----------



## smooth (Sep 26, 2005)

Thanks for the info coalman. 

I think the video you saw, was the one I uploaded later, that was the reduced file size. I have it now where you can choose from two different sizes. The high bandwidth one is the original size.


----------



## thecoalman (Mar 6, 2006)

smooth246 said:


> I used Windows Movie Maker to bring the size down for the low bandwidth one.


Two things, you changed the AR or aspect ratio.Notice he looks stretched vertically. Look for the 16:9 setting.

The new one is about half the bandwidth of the original, 340kpps. The one I posted is about 70kbps. To put that in persepective a dial-up modem at it's best is only 56kbps. I'd suggest even trying to reduce it further.


----------



## smooth (Sep 26, 2005)

I see what you mean about the Aspect Ratio. Unfortunately, Windows Movie Maker doesn't have a file setting for 320 X 180, which would be half the video size of the large one, keeping the AR the same.

The one I have now is 320 X 240, so it's close, but the 60 pixels is what is making him taller. Do you know of any free program that would let me get the 320 X 180 size I need?

Also, I shouldn't go any lower in video size than 320 X 180 should I? That would be a really small video to watch. Would going with a 320 X 180 with a lower bit rate be better? Or will the quality suffer a lot?


----------



## thecoalman (Mar 6, 2006)

The aspect can be determined by a flag despite what the resolution is. In movie Maker click options>advanced and set it to 16:9 under aspect.... that tip courtesy of Jack from another thread....  

MS Media Encoder will give you many more options than what is avaialble in Movie Maker. It's also a little more complicated.

As I mentioned I'd suggest trying to lower the bitrate even further. At the current settings people on dial-up will still be sitting there for well over a half hour before it starts playing.  Only way to find out what's acceptable to you is to experiment... Getting video that works well for dial up is nearly impossible without making it the size of a postage stamp. The example I gave above is about the best you can do.


----------



## MysticEyes (Mar 30, 2002)

smooth246 said:


> I think I found a good solution to the problem I was having
> 
> Check out the link and see what you think now. I have it where you can choose low bandwidth or high bandwidth.  I used Windows Movie Maker to bring the size down for the low bandwidth one.


Nice job, and now you have all users covered, plus it looks more professional.:up:


----------



## smooth (Sep 26, 2005)

thecoalman said:


> The aspect can be determined by a flag despite what the resolution is. In movie Maker click options>advanced and set it to 16:9 under aspect.... that tip courtesy of Jack from another thread....


Awesome advice there. :up: I didn't know you could change the AR that way. 

I changed it now, and the Dial-up version is only 1MB! lol What do you think of it now?

I may actually bring the broadband size down a little, since it is still 32 MB, maybe to a little bit smaller, to help load time. What do you think?


----------



## thecoalman (Mar 6, 2006)

Most players will respect the AR flag, others will not.

Your 1 MB file is better for dial up BUT you reduced it quite a bit.... If you get Media Encoder you can set the bitrate which dtermines the final filesize. You can for example use the same resolution as your orignal and use a very low bitrate... that will produceterrible results I'm just using it as an example...

You have to find the happy medium. Reducing the framerate helps a lot in this case where you're looking for small file size because you can still use a larger resolution. This also allows more data per frame reducing macroblocking... the trade off is it may appear slightly jerky.


----------



## smooth (Sep 26, 2005)

Would a 7 MB file still be too large for dial-up?

I can get a pretty good resolution, with a less bit rate, to have it at that size.


----------



## thecoalman (Mar 6, 2006)

smooth246 said:


> Would a 7 MB file still be too large for dial-up?
> .


That's too big... rough guess is in the 20-30 minute range.


----------



## smooth (Sep 26, 2005)

Ok, I got it down to 2.5 MB now.  I know it's still really small.


----------

