amazing video compression

[capybara]

most MPEG videos are about 10 meg / minute. m/l 40 meg for a 4 minute music video.
I just download a *.wmv7 (windows media 7 video) file that was 38.6 meg.
so i figured it was about 4 minutes, right? but it was 53 min 44 seconds.
it was 718 kbps at 288 x 162 pixels and 15 fps .
I hate to give m$ credit for anything, but this is awesome compression, imho,
about 14 times more compressed that the usual MPEG.

 

[glugglug]

DivX is 11 times smaller than MPEG2 at the same quality level, which is in turn quite a bit smaller than MPEGs.

718kbps for 288x162@15fps is not impressive at all. First of all, most of the mpegs you are looking at are 30fps. Secondly 288x162 is a pathetically low resolution. Basically the compression you are seeing SUCKS compared to modern compression methods like DivX or Xvid, in fact when you take that horrible resolution & framerate into account, it might just be MPEG2.

Edit: I take that back, it can't be MPEG2 because it's not that good.
288x162x15fps = 2.1MBps before any compression. To bring this down to 718kbps is just a 23.4:1 compression ratio. Well within the capabilities of JPEG - that's right compressing each image as a photo and not even taking into account that you are working with video data. Standard MPEG-1 is actually better than what you are looking at.

Also why is this in Highly Technical?

 

[capybara]

well youre sort of missing the point which is: 53 minutes of video fitting in 38 meg,
which means about 16 Hours of video on a regular cd. but i appreciate your answer, which
is why i posted it here - your answer is highly technical to me, which is what i wanted.
thx, capy

 

[uart]

Nah, I think it was you who missed the point that your video cant possibly be 718 kbps at that file size, it must actually be a much lower bps rate, which may indeed corespond to an impressive compression

I just download a *.wmv7 (windows media 7 video) file that was 38.6 meg.
so i figured it was about 4 minutes, right? but it was 53 min 44 seconds.
it was 718 kbps at 288 x 162 pixels and 15 fps .

Something is wrong with your data. 718 kbps * 54 minutes equals approx 290 MB not 38.6 meg. This has nothing to do with the compression it is just simple maths. Something is wrong.

Glugglug was correctly pointing out that getting 288 x 162 @ 15fps video down to 718 kbps is not in the least bit impressive.

 

[boran]

by a simple tool known as calc.exe I deduct thy bitrate to be 98.080397022332506203473945409429 kbps
so about 1/7th of what the oh so wonderful (sarcasm) windooze media player claims.

 

[BigPoppa]

Was it just video, or audio and video? 53 minutes of 128 bit mp3 is still 60ish megs. Have to wonder how much of it was the audio alone, that could change things a lot.

 

[glugglug]

98kbps is still not the slightest bit impressive for that low a resolution/framerate, even if it is near lossless.

 

[capybara]

ok. lemme start over.
38 mb / 53 minutes = 717 kb per minute = 12 kbps is right.
288 x 162 = 46k pixels per frame. the fps is just enough that the motion isnt jerky. my estimation of 15 fps is probably too low.
the video is HIGHLY pixelated as you can imagine.
===========================================
ps - fwiw, the video was
The White Stripes - live at glastonbury.wmv