http://www.dvlabs.com/

The video in their front page loads almost instantly, and is only 6MB in size.

Look at that image!

Wow!

That's pretty damn good. Thanks for the link. I'm just getting a site built and was getting some bandwith grief. Gonna have to follow up on this. Must be pricy though.

Yeah, I looked more into it and they are using Flash 8.

http://www.adobe.com/products/flash/flashpro/

They import the edited footage into flash, then export it with a codec called On2-VP6 to a flash video (.flv) file that is then loaded into a flash (.swf) container in the site.

It's like $700. The Sundance short films were put online and apparently used this compression. However, one of the most important factors is that their raw footage must have been either film or HD, so a DV image probably wouldn't look as good.

Definitley beats YouTube compression though.

For a quick loading flash example - check out this site.

http://www.doublevisionproductions.com

I watched the flash(the link in the first post). It seems quite good.
May I ask how is that compare to wmv mpeg4 v9, divx5.1, h2.64 etc?

TIA

Regards
Leigh
Yeah, I looked more into it and they are using Flash 8.

http://www.adobe.com/products/flash/flashpro/

They import the edited footage into flash, then export it with a codec called On2-VP6 to a flash video (.flv) file that is then loaded into a flash (.swf) container in the site.

It's like $700. The Sundance short films were put online and apparently used this compression. However, one of the most important factors is that their raw footage must have been either film or HD, so a DV image probably wouldn't look as good.

Definitley beats YouTube compression though.

Flash 8's VP6.2 codec supposedly ranks alongside Microsoft's WMV9 and trails behind H.264, according to the enthusiasts at doom9.

I also looked at the DVLabs video, and discovered that it is 760x412 @ 25 fps (you can tell it is European!) The video is 29 seconds and 7.34MB, so unless I made a mistake, that makes for a bit rate of 2Mbps. Hardly what you would call tight compression!

They import the edited footage into flash, then export it with a codec called On2-VP6 to a flash video (.flv) file that is then loaded into a flash (.swf) container in the site.
Is that how it loads so quick?

I have been messing with Flash 8 for the past couple weeks testing compression and ending file sizes compared to Windows Media Encoder.

I made a post in this forum about it, but I've been pretty impressed with the DivX 6.3 web player. There's a Youtube-like community called Stage6 where these videos can be uploaded and shared. You can even upload 720p. Unfortunately, you have to download the web player but it's a very small file.

More information: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=74864

The footage looked great and had minimal compression artifacts.

One issue I have is the frame rate. It looked like 15 fps rather than 30 which would give a full motion look.

Impressive.

One issue I have is the frame rate. It looked like 15 fps rather than 30 which would give a full motion look.

I was thinking the same thing while watching it: looks like 15 fps. If the bit rate is around 2 Mbps then the quality isn't all that surprising, but the load time is.

I was thinking the same thing while watching it: looks like 15 fps. If the bit rate is around 2 Mbps then the quality isn't all that surprising, but the load time is.
That's what gets me Kevin, the load time. The quality is nice but the load time is REAL nice. I will have to test at work tomorrow where we have the slowest T1 line (fractional) in the history of lines. Might be slower than dial-up sometimes. If those videos load that quick at work, then I may have to dig a little more into how.