MP4 vs. MPEG4 vs. MPEG (H.264) vs. ?????

[goddi]

Greetings,

There have been many postings about the 'MPEG4 (H.264)' and other terms such as 'MP4', and just 'MPEG4', etc. So, I am not sure exactly what people are really referring to when I try to compare them and understand what the differences are. Then I come across a choice that I can make when I use my Freemake Video Converter program to convert my MOV video files to MP4 format. I don't convert to AVI because the MP4 format seems to always give me smaller sized files. Anyway, my question is, when I select 'MP4' as the format I want to convert to, I then have the choice to choose the 'MPEG4 video codec' (see attached). I have the choice of 'H.264' or 'MPEG4'. Since I see that 'MPEG4 (H.264)' is talked about (a combination of 'MPEG4' and 'H.264'), I am confused as to what video codec should be used or why one would be better then the other.

Can someone shed some light on which Video Codec choice is 'better' (in the Freemake Video Converter) when it comes to using it for a video conversion for PTE?

Thanks,

Gary

[davegee]

Why convert at all?

Which Camera?

DG

[goddi]

Why convert at all?

Which Camera?

DG

=======================

Dave,

I have several cameras that take video: a Nikon D7000 (MOV; 22000kps bitrate; 23 fps); a Nikon AW100(MOV; 14000kbp; 29 fps); and a GoPro (MP4; 15000kps bitrate; 29 fps).

Why convert? My main purpose to convert is to reduce the size of the videos I insert into PTE. After much trial and error, I seem to find that if I convert them to the MP4 format AND reduce the bitrate, the file size dramatically reduces and I don't see any loss in quality. I think a bitrate of less than 7000kps seems to be close to a visible loss in quality but that is just my benchmark.

I see people say that using PTE's convert process to the AVI format puts less stress on the video processing. That might be true, but I get a larger sized file and I have not seen any problem using the MP4 format with my system. But...a few days ago, at a computer seminar, I tried one of my PTE shows that contain a lot of video and it really was a mess. Very jerky. It was played on the instructors laptop from my thumbdrive. I don't know if it was the thumbdrive or her laptop causing the problem, but maybe her laptop could not handle the higher requirements of the MP4??? Duno.

So that is why I convert my video files and I like to use Freemake Video Converter to convert my original video files. I get smaller file size with the MP4 format AND I can reduce the bitrate. But, the Freemake program also lets me choose the 'Video Codec'. But I just don't understand why I would choose one over the other (MPEG vs. H.264). I usually see them together as 'MPEG (H.264). But here, I can choose one or the other when I have selected the MP4 format.

Just confused...

Gary

[fh1805]

I don't convert to AVI because the MP4 format seems to always give me smaller sized files.

Gary,

Are you sure you are chasing the right rainbow? Consider the following:

Image files: which offers better quality - TIFF or JPEG? - and which is the smaller?

Audio files: which offers better quality - WAV or MP3? - and which is the smaller?

Video files: which offers better quality - AAA or BBB? - and which is the smaller?

It doesn't always follow that a small file size is a desirable thing to have.

My camera creates AVI video files and I don't convert them because PTE accepts them and plays them excellently on my relatively low-spec graphics card. I have no idea whether or not I could get smaller files by converting them. For me, size is not an issue. What I want is acceptable quality. The ex-camera AVI files give me that and with a minimum of post-processing required - just some simple trimming in PTE's "Convert video file" feature. Quality first, file size second.

Just a thought for you to ponder on...

Peter

[davegee]

Your first request for info was in the post that I made refering to Video Output from PTE so that confused me?

Have you tried the PTE Video converter and does it not do what you want?

I'm using video straight out of my wife's Nikon (H.264 MOV) and I'm not finding any problems with it (so far). I need to try it on other computers!

My laptop handles it OK and the spec is not that good.The file size is not a concern but I would not want a stuttering performance!!

DG

[goddi]

Gary,

Are you sure you are chasing the right rainbow? Consider the following:

It doesn't always follow that a small file size is a desirable thing to have.

My camera creates AVI video files and I don't convert them because PTE accepts them and plays them excellently on my relatively low-spec graphics card. I have no idea whether or not I could get smaller files by converting them. For me, size is not an issue. What I want is acceptable quality. The ex-camera AVI files give me that and with a minimum of post-processing required - just some simple trimming in PTE's "Convert video file" feature. Quality first, file size second....

Peter

========================

Peter,

You said you want acceptable quality. I have said the same thing. No argument there. But if I can get similar quality with a smaller sized file, that is what I want to achieve. When I want to upload a video to Beechbrook, I don't want to stretch my welcome with a gigantic file. And, people have complained when the file size exceeds their predetermined limits. Some have lower download speeds then others, so I try to accommodate these concerns. It seems that I have been adding video to my PTE shows a bit more than most and, perhaps, this has not been a noticeable problem for most PTE users, yet.

Sure, I can let PTE 'convert' my video files but this process makes them even bigger than the original files. My original question is not a question of to-convert-or-not-to-convert. It has to do with an additional choice that I can make while using the Freemake Video Converter program that lets me choose a 'Video Codec', which gives me the choice of 'MPEG' and 'H.264'.

I am wondering which one is better or what the reason is to choose one vs. the other. This is more of a technical question that comes up within this conversion process. I see that there is much discussion about 'MPEG (H.264)', so I don't understand why I can have the additional option to choose 'MPEG' or 'H.264' separately, under the MP4 format.

Gary

[Rickl]

I would like to join the OP in asking the question... MPEG4 vs H.264 vs MOV vs AVI?

There are a couple if issues here I think..

File size: Important if you are sharing your AV with others via the internet... I halved the size of a short 6 minute AV with a 3 minute MOV video and some 40 still images by compressing the video with an xvid codec (229mb down to 103 mb)

Video quality: This probably has more to do with computer hardware performance i.e. speed of the CPU / graphics processor (if there is one) of the player. Is there a guide somewhere on how to optimize video quality with file size? Compression has a tremendous impact on file size as we all know, but just because it works great with my Macbook Pro's I7 decompression and graphic processor, will it stutter with a slower processor/laptop. Will PTE deliver a smoother output with a less compressed video at the expense of file size?

I think we all want the best quality in our presentations, and I would like to know which route to take in processing video to deliver stutter free video for the lowest performing computer in the chain...

Dick

[goddi]

Your first request for info was in the post that I made refering to Video Output from PTE so that confused me?

Have you tried the PTE Video converter and does it not do what you want?

I'm using video straight out of my wife's Nikon (H.264 MOV) and I'm not finding any problems with it (so far). I need to try it on other computers!

My laptop handles it OK and the spec is not that good.The file size is not a concern but I would not want a stuttering performance!!

DG

==============================

Dave,

My original request for info was not referring to Video Output from PTE. It had to do with a choice that I find in the converting menu of Freemake Video Converter. After I have selected the conversion format of MP4, it lets me choose a 'Video Codec' of 'MPEG' or 'H.264'. This is my confusion...what does this mean? What is the effect of one vs. the other? Why choose one vs. the other?

As I have mention in my reply to Peter, my goal in converting my video files is to reduce their size but retain quality. Sure, I have tried the PTE Video Converter, but many times it make the file size even bigger than the original size. And I don't know what the 'Quality' choice means. I don't know what it is doing so I just avoid using it. Nor does it allow changing the bitrate, which seems to be the main factor in reducing video file size.

Gary

Added later: I just did a test and converted an MP4 video file using PTE's converting process. It converted a 77Mb MP4 to a 345 mb AVI. Not acceptable.

[LumenLux]

Gary, currently, I am seldom bothered with all the video conversion options that drove me somewhat crazy for years. So, I can not readily answer your Mp4 etc. questions. I can say, I have become a huge fan of the built-in converter Igor has in PTE. Like you, I integrate video in many of my home/family shows. I recently made a 34 minute "trip report" AV containing mostly video with perhaps 60 stills. PTE's built-in converter, as said, did not save any space, but made the product run smoothly as video. For many of my productions, I keep an EXE version for myself and possible projector use to an in-person audience. But I usually "publish" online a PTE video version as more "family and friends", Facebook, Youtube etc., are comfortable to access the show in that format. Often I prefer my audience to not be subjected to all the "suggested" videos on Youtube when my video finishes. So I may use a quick blog site (Blogger, etc.) as the vehicle for my videos that are hosted on Youtube.

[fh1805]

It converted a 77Mb MP4 to a 345 mb AVI.

We need someone who really does understand all this technical stuff to give us a definitive answer. For what it might be worth (not very much, perhaps), my understanding is that the MP4 file is a "light" file that is heavily compressed. It will place a high demand on the playback system whilst the compressed data is de-compressed. The AVI is a "heavy" file that is lightly compressed. It will place less strain on the playback system. The MP4 will travel over the net quicker, the AVI will take much longer to travel. The MP4 will occupy less server space, the AVI will occupy more.

Which is more important to you? Only you, the user, can answer that question. Your system and my system have different processing capability. Your ISP and my ISP may well offer different server limits and broadband speeds. There is no universal panacea, no "best" solution that is "right" for everybody. There is only a solution that is the best one for your/my individual circumstances.

One other point: The AVI files out of my Nikon D300s are encoded using the MJPEG codec. The same data, when it comes out of PTE's "Convert video file" function as an AVI file, is encoded using the MPEG4 codec. So AVI does not equal AVI. There are "flavours" of AVI.

regards,

Peter

[xahu34]

Just a remark: AVI, MP4, MOV, MKV are video container (file) formats. They are not that much responsible for the size of the video file. Inside such a container, there is the video that has been encoded using some codec. Examples: Encoder Xvid using the encoding method MPEG-4, Part 2 (Advanced Simple Profile). Encoder x264 (also used by PTE when creating MP4 videos) using the encoding method MPEG-4, Part 10 (Advanced Video Coding, also called AVC/H.264). The size of a video file mainly depends on the encoding method and on the chosen parameters. A modern encoding method like H.264 produces smaller files but the decoder has to do more work. So it seems that inside a PTE sequence larger video files based on a simpler encoding method do perform in a better way.

Regards,

Xaver

[davegee]

Good explanation Xaver.

Gary,

I tried one of my MOV files through the converter at the Quality % which produced the same size file and the does not appear to be that much difference.

PTE's Converter defaults to 50% and I tried 30-40% with acceptable results and same size files compared to the original.

What % figure produced the 300+ Mb file from a 70Mb file?

DG

[goddi]

Good explanation Xaver.

Gary,

I tried one of my MOV files through the converter at the Quality % which produced the same size file and the does not appear to be that much difference.

PTE's Converter defaults to 50% and I tried 30-40% with acceptable results and same size files compared to the original.

What % figure produced the 300+ Mb file from a 70Mb file?

DG

===================

Dave,

I just let it run through with the default settings, 50%. Weird.... Sometimes the converted file is smaller, most times it is bigger. I just can't get a handle on what it is doing what it does, so I don't use it.

But I am getting a bit frustrated. None of the replies so far have addressed my real question about selecting the Video Codec for an MP4 conversion in Freemake. Why do I need to select a codec? Which one should I select? What is the effect of one vs. the other? Everyone is dancing around all of the other aspects of a video question, but not my main point. I am sure not too many people have run across this choice except, maybe, those who have used Freemake, and maybe most have never noticed it. I have not seen it in any other video conversion program nor in PTE's converting process. I am just trying to understand what effect these two choices might have with converting a video.

Gary

[goddi]

Just a remark: AVI, MP4, MOV, MKV are video container (file) formats. They are not that much responsible for the size of the video file. Inside such a container, there is the video that has been encoded using some codec. Examples: Encoder Xvid using the encoding method MPEG-4, Part 2 (Advanced Simple Profile). Encoder x264 (also used by PTE when creating MP4 videos) using the encoding method MPEG-4, Part 10 (Advanced Video Coding, also called AVC/H.264). The size of a video file mainly depends on the encoding method and on the chosen parameters. A modern encoding method like H.264 produces smaller files but the decoder has to do more work. So it seems that inside a PTE sequence larger video files based on a simpler encoding method do perform in a better way.

Regards,

Xaver

=========================

Xaver,

Great. Getting closer to an understanding. The 'container' explanation helps. So it is the Video Codec that is more responsible for the size of the video file. Ok.

So then, can you explain what the difference is between the two Video Codecs that I can choose from in the Freemake Video Converter's MP4 container: 'MPEG4' and 'H.264', as seen in the attachment?

Thanks... Gary

[davegee]

Never used Freemake - can't answer that.

Perhaps there's an answer within PTE.

If you use Publish > AVI Video File the custom setting offers the XVID Codec version as an MPEG4 file.

The HD Video option is the one that produces the H.264 option.

[goddi]

Gary,

I tried one of my MOV files through the converter at the Quality % which produced the same size file and the does not appear to be that much difference.

PTE's Converter defaults to 50% and I tried 30-40% with acceptable results and same size files compared to the original.

What % figure produced the 300+ Mb file from a 70Mb file?

DG

=============================

Dave, I just looked more closely at those two files, one the original MP4 and the PTE converted AVI file. The only difference I see is that the original MP4 file (77mb) shows a codec of 'H.264' and the PTE converted file (336mb) shows a codec of 'MPEG4'.

I will do a test in Freemake. I will convert one with the 'MPEG4' codec and one with the 'H.264' and see what the size difference is.

Gary

[davegee]

We may have been writing at the same time - I was looking at the V7 AVI options.

Try looking at the V7.5 Beta 4 AVI options.

MPEG4-ASP = AVI

DG

[xahu34]

...

So then, can you explain what the difference is between the two Video Codecs that I can choose from in the Freemake Video Converter's MP4 container: 'MPEG4' and 'H.264', as seen in the attachment?

...

I do not know exactly about the terminology of your converter, but I would guess that MPEG4 means the first method from my post above, while H.264 means the second one. Also, I do not have much experience with video clips in PTE. But (as far as I know) the first choice is said to be the better one for the decoder inside PTE. Just make a try. Looking at your attachment, I do not know if a bitrate of 7000 isn't too small for a FullHD video. You should make some tests!

Regards,

Xaver

[Lin Evans]

I'm not certain how much help this may be in consideration of the original question, but I think the things to keep in mind are the differences between "standards (organizations), encodings (codecs), and containers."

Let's start with a very popular "container" (file format for packaging video data) AVI. The AVI container may contain any of a number of different video encodings. This is why it is usually better to not depend on AVI for popular distribution. The user's equipment must have access to a codec (compress/decompress algorithm) which can play the video as it was encoded. Several popular players now include codecs (Kantaris Media Player, as an example) and this is less of a problem than it once was, but still it's safer to use one widely distributed standard.

MPEG is a standard. Within the MPEG standard are various profiles and levels such as MPEG-2, MPEG-4, etc. Levels support variations such as HD or standard definition, etc. MPEG-4 h.264 Part 10 or sometimes referred to as AVC (Advanced Video Coding) is one of the levels used for BluRay encoding. All BluRay players must be able to decode h.264. It's also used by a majority of streaming video providers such as Youtube, Vimeo, iTunes, etc. The idea is to provide a solution with lower bit rate without sacrificing quality while still maintaining wide compatibility. This is why h.264 is probably the "safe" bet for compatibility with the most equipment.

So when creating a PTE show for distribution, it make sense to use MPEG-4 h.264 (MP4 h.264). One must choose among the various possibilities according to the final dispensation of the program. Also, it's necessary to choose according to the complexity of the make up of the slideshow. Personally, I've found that on my own Samsung HD TV, h.264 will not run extremely taxing animations smoothly. So for use on my television, I encode with either XVID (AVI) or Igor's PTE equivalent (MPEG4 ASP).

David has found that in his experience MP4 h.264 produced better quality in high definition images. So it might be better, if there are no taxing animations, to use MP4 h.264 for producing output for general purposes.

Lin

[davegee]

Lin,

I wonder if there are other variables such as the "quality" (for want of a better word) of the Media Players installed in different makes (and models) of TV? Can we assume that they are all equal?

I haven't reached the limit of the "taxing animations" of which you speak or I would notice it straight away.

There are too many variables here to make anything other than generalities.

DG

[goddi]

...David has found that in his experience MP4 h.264 produced better quality in high definition images. So it might be better, if there are no taxing animations, to use MP4 h.264 for producing output for general purposes.

Lin

===========================

Greetings Lin and others,

I just did a test using Freemake Video Converter to convert an original MP4 file, size 76mb, bitrate 2609 kbps. Interesting results:

Test 1- Converted original file to MP4 container, using the MPEG4 Video Codec, bitrate came out as 2756 kbps. Size came out at 80.3mb. (Larger size probably due to slight increase in bitrate).

Test 2- Converted original file to MP4 container, using the H.264 Video Codec, bitrate came out as 2860 kbps. Size came out at 83.3mb. (Larger size probably due to slight increase in bitrate).

Test 3- Converted original file using PTE's conversion process to AVI, defaults settings. The original size of 73mb jumped to 336mb. Why? I notice that the PTE converted file's bitrate shows 16060 kbps.

So, keeping the bitrate relatively the same, the file size stays relatively the same. The Video Codecs did not have much effect, in this case. But the bitrate does have a major effect.

I think this is my biggest problem with the PTE conversion process. I don't know how to control the bitrate. Why would the bitrate jump to 16060 kbps from the original 2609 kbps???

I also ran the original MP4 file through Freemake to convert it to an MP4 and set the bitrate to 16060 kbps and the file size jumped to 246mb. So, I hope that Igor will put in some kind of control where we can select what the bitrate is when the PTE conversion process is used. The 'Quality' setting leaves me cold. Size matters!

Gary

[fh1805]

Why would the bitrate jump to 16060 kbps from the original 2609 kbps???

I would "guess": probably because the file has not been so heavily compressed. Less compressed data = less work for the computer to have to do on playback. In turn, this means there is some spare resource left over to drive the complex 3D transforms, pans, zooms, rotates that can be applied to a video object.

Perhaps what we are identifying here is a need for a couple of presets in the "Convert video file": one for video used "statically" and a second for video used "in animation". The "Static" preset can apply fairly strong compression. The "In Animation" preset must apply much less severe compression.

Gary, are you up for a couple more tests? Take the small file into a simple project and subject it to some reasonably complex pan, zoom, rotate, 3D transforms. Observe how smooth the playback is. Do exactly the same with the big file. I realise this is a subjective test and valid only on your system but it might shed a little more light on things.

regards,

Peter

[Lin Evans]

Hi Dave,

That's a good question. Probably, without extensive testing we will not be able to know that. Obviously, players can account for many of the perceived differences we see. For example, early on, Igor discovered that the Classic Home Cinema media player produced superior results with PTE video output. Later, I discovered that Kantaris Media Player, which uses the VLC engine was the best on my systems.

There are indeed many variables which include, but are not limited to system resources including OS, GPU, CPU, player and associated software. What works on your system may indeed not work as well on mine and vice versa. I found that on all of my systems which include XP Home Edition, Win 7 Pro and Win 7 Starter all with different GPU's, the XVID video played my complex animations smoothly while MP4 h.264 was problematic for the same animations. Likewise on my 40" LED Samsung HD 1080P Television. On your systems you found that though the animations were smooth with XVID, the image quality was better with equal animation smoothness with h.264. This leads me to believe that there are some significant differences and that these differences may even have location inferences. Perhaps standards for different countries for television players might be different because of the PAL versus NTSC issues?

The important thing, I believe, is for the user to find what works best for his/her own use and "hope" that this will work as well for those who the shows are distributed to.

Best regards,

LIn

[goddi]

I would "guess": probably because the file has not been so heavily compressed. Less compressed data = less work for the computer to have to do on playback. In turn, this means there is some spare resource left over to drive the complex 3D transforms, pans, zooms, rotates that can be applied to a video object.

Perhaps what we are identifying here is a need for a couple of presets in the "Convert video file": one for video used "statically" and a second for video used "in animation". The "Static" preset can apply fairly strong compression. The "In Animation" preset must apply much less severe compression.

Gary, are you up for a couple more tests? Take the small file into a simple project and subject it to some reasonably complex pan, zoom, rotate, 3D transforms. Observe how smooth the playback is. Do exactly the same with the big file. I realise this is a subjective test and valid only on your system but it might shed a little more light on things.

regards,

Peter

====================

Greetings Peter,

I will have to try that test later when I have more time. But I have never had any problem playing any of the souped-up PTE file that have come from Lin or you or the others who have made some of the 'heavy duty' shows.

But I don't see why PTE is taking it upon itself to 'change' the bitrate of my video file. It should not compress or un-compress the video. It does not do it with our jpgs. Converting a video to a better 'container' or 'codec' so that it works better within PTE might be ok, but it does not know what I am going to do with it as far as the need to change the bitrate. Why not just put in the ability for us to change the bitrate which would normally be less, not more. Videos that come out of the camera are usually quite high and I would not think there is a reason to increase them. And what is the effect of increasing the bitrate? Does it degrade the image as the compression of a jpg does??? Duno.

I hope you can bend Igor's ear and take out the 'Quality' and put in 'Bitrate' as a control.

Thanks.... Gary

[Lin Evans]

Hi Gary,

Increasing bitrate does the opposite of "degrade" a video. Within the considerations of the playing environment, increasing bitrate lends smoothness and presentation quality to a video and has nothing to do with compression. What it does have to do with is how much data is available to the processing environment within a given temporal period.

The purpose of the conversion within PTE is to make your video/slideshow play the best it "can" play in your PTE show. The only time lower bitrate is really needed is when you must spool the video through a bandwidth limited environment.

Keep in mind that "compression" is a convenience for primarily a couple of considerations. It give smaller file size for distribution and storage. When the video or image is played, it is "never" played in a compressed mode, but rather expanded in memory to its full original size. For example - when you take an 8 bit TIFF file and compress it with a jpg algorithm - let's say it started life as a 10 megabyte file and when compressed it becomes 800K in file size. As soon as it is loaded into your computer's memory, it expands to the original 10 megabyte size. The "only" differences are the load time and the file size for storage or transport across a bottleneck environment such as the internet. Likewise for video. Once it gets into the memory of the player or computer, it expands to the original pre-encoded size for playback.

Igor has carefully determined what works "best" in PTE and if the bitrate is increased from what you created with another product, it's because PTE can and will play it better with the increased bitrate.

Best regards,

Lin

====================

Greetings Peter,

I will have to try that test later when I have more time. But I have never had any problem playing any of the souped-up PTE file that have come from Lin or you or the others who have made some of the 'heavy duty' shows.

But I don't see why PTE is taking it upon itself to 'change' the bitrate of my video file. It should not compress or un-compress the video. It does not do it with our jpgs. Converting a video to a better 'container' or 'codec' so that it works better within PTE might be ok, but it does not know what I am going to do with it as far as the need to change the bitrate. Why not just put in the ability for us to change the bitrate which would normally be less, not more. Videos that come out of the camera are usually quite high and I would not think there is a reason to increase them. And what is the effect of increasing the bitrate? Does it degrade the image as the compression of a jpg does??? Duno.

I hope you can bend Igor's ear and take out the 'Quality' and put in 'Bitrate' as a control.

Thanks.... Gary