ATTENTION SCOTTEVEST Travel Clothing Blog Readers

Scott's Offical blog has permanently moved: Scott's Community
Update your browser's bookmark to http://community.scottevest.com/blog



Thursday, August 14, 2008

Travel Vest 360 View Exterior and Interior

Video thumbnail. Click to play
Click To Play

Posted by Scott Jordan, CEO of SCOTTEVEST/SeV

19 comments:

Jorge said...

Hi Scott,

Great video! There is a little black showing on the bottom of the vest so maybe change the background to black.
Also the image size is too big, you have it at 1920x1080. If you want it in HD use 1280x720 or 768x576 SD.

By the way, that hand model was a Pro. LOL

7:53 PM
lewisge said...

Scott... I love this video... it really shows the vest well.

You might want to reduce the image size, like Jorge suggested. If I am on my 24'' screen, it is fine... but, if go to my laptop... I don't see all of it.

I also like having the iPhone in there. ;-)

9:00 PM
Anonymous said...

Shooting for blue ray in 1080p is relatively pointless for streaming video on the web. 99% of the users won't even have the screen resolutions to view it, nor the bandwidth to stream it continuously without a long wait...

12:34 AM
TJO said...

We shot this in high quality HD so we could have the most flexibility for our outputs, but I think we can dial down the settings for export. Do any of you guys have experience with Final Cut?

6:15 AM
Anonymous said...

The point is that even on your High-def TV the video is only being delivered at 720p and that's with a lot of compression with the video codecs that are being used to compress the HD video. 1080p is not even delivered through your cable service. So basically you are trying to deliver 1080p over the web, which your average cable modem that is being utilized across this country would take a long time serving up since it's trying to pass 100's of megabytes in order to play just a few minutes of 1080P HD video. I bet even 5 years from now you won't be seeing a lot of channels (if any) delivered in 1080p. So, there are a lot of limitations to the latest and greatest technology, and it's use.

7:36 AM
Jorge said...

I thought that TV broadcasters for example sports networks were going 1080i.

Have you guys heard of the future HD standard 2K and 4K ?

Oakley is using it right now in the new RED cameras. To bad nothing can really display it :(

7:45 AM
Anonymous said...

1080i is not 1080p. 1080i is mostly a tricked out version of 720p that uses interlacting techniques to get it to a higher resolution. But not all the lines on the screen are displayed in 1080i when compared to 1080p. It's equivalent to taking a 720p image and scaling it up. So, the quality is about the same as 720p. Shooting in 1080p is only good if you are using it for blue-ray. It's definitely not a format for the web, nor for your average cable channel.

8:30 AM
Jorge said...

Thanks for the info. Anonymous.

I didn't know that :)

9:17 AM
Anonymous said...

Glad to help.

Here is a good article on it:

http://www.bluesky-web.com/numbers-mean-little.htm

"The advocates of 1080i HDTV support their cause with a flurry of numbers: 1080 lines, 1920 pixels per line, 2 million pixels per frame. The numbers, however, don't tell the whole story. If we multiply 1920 pixels per line times 1080 lines, we find that each 1080i frame is composed of about two million pixels. 1080i advocates are quick to point out that a 720P frame, at 1280 pixels by 720 lines, is composed of about one million pixels. They usually fail to mention that during the time that 1080i has constructed a single frame of two million pixels, about 1/30 second, 720P has constructed two complete frames, which is also about two million pixels. Thus, in a given one-second interval, both 1080i and 720P scan out about 60 million pixels. The truth is that, by design, the data rates of the two scanning formats are approximately equal, and 1080i has no genuine advantage in the pixel rate department. In fact, if the horizontal pixel count of 1080i is reduced to 1440, as is done in some encoders to reduce the volume of artifacts generated when compressing 1080i, the 1080i pixel count per second is less than that of 720P."

10:04 AM
Scott Jordan, CEO of SCOTTEVEST/SeV said...

i think i fixed it here http://blip.tv/file/1173116

the settings for taking, rendering and converting are huge pain in the but... any firm help on this with screen shots on Final Cut Pro would be very helpful

10:16 AM
Anonymous said...

Well, when you're taking native 1080p HD Format video, and trying to work with, expect to hammer your processor. I don't know what computer you are using, but unless you have 8 gigs of ram, and a mighty quad-pro processor, forget instantaneous gratification when trying to output with HD.

You're basically tasking your computer to hammer out 4 million pixels at 1/30th of a second. The video you just uploaded is scaled to be more around what is delivered at 480p, which is much more managable for use on the web..

10:36 AM
TJO said...

Hi Anonymous... you sound like a pro! Are you involved in video editing, etc. professionally or as a hobby? We could use some help in getting our settings, etc. hammered out along with some other good stuff.... Please let me know.

10:40 AM
Anonymous said...

Thom, we've talked.

I just recently stumbled on to scott's blog, saw some things, and decided to provide some common two cents. Before jumping into anything, I like to glimpse what i could possibly be jumping into.

11:11 AM
TJO said...

Hi Anonymous - please drop me another e-mail thom @ scottevest . com (without the spaces)... since I don't know who you are from the blog posts ;-)

11:25 AM
lewisge said...

Thom... are you using Final Cut Pro or Final Cut Express? Reason I'm asking is the Pro version has a lot more options in terms of formats and compression. But you can also do quite a bit with the Express version.

Also, what is the target?... TV commercials? Web? Other?


Gary Lewis

1:18 PM
TJO said...

Hi Gary - we use Final Cut Express for now. The advantages of FCP over Express seem to be on which formats, codecs, etc. you can import from (but I'm far from an expert on any of this). Scott does most of his own editing, at least until we can transition to a more permanent solution. For most of the videos hosted by Scott and the 360s, we shoot for something that could be repurposed up to DVD quality (for in-store collateral, etc.). For blog posts and the like, they don't need to exceed online streaming standards.

1:23 PM
lewisge said...

Thom... yes... FCE has most of the features of the base of FCP. Motion, which is included in FCP is pretty cool, though. I have made some DVDs for high school graduations and other events. My own personal opinion is that doing HD level for most applications is really not necessary... unless you're doing a nature documentary or something like that. The processing required for that level of rendering/encoding is staggering when you look at the supposed benefit (output). You'll hear differing opinions on this... but, from my own personal experience... for most of what I have done... HD is kind of overblown.

9:57 PM
Scott Jordan, CEO of SCOTTEVEST/SeV said...

Gary, would you mind (on MOnday/Tuesday) talking me through proper settings for:
-which resolution i should be filming;
-settings for quicktime conversion?

Do you know any good editors we can use?

Scott

7:04 AM
lewisge said...

Scott... check your e-mail. I put something out on blip.tv that I hope might be helpful.

7:01 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)