where to host video's

[tekkie]

Anyone find a good site to host HD video's? smugmug is charging 150 bucks a year to do basic HD and I am not willing to pay that for the couple times I will use it

I sent them an email asking if they are planning to release any new plans because obviously there will be more people looking for this all the time now with the new camera abilities.

if anyone has any ideas let me know.

[liquidstone]

Vimeo rocks. Free at a max of 500 MB/week, you can upload up to 2GB/week + perks for a paid account.

http://www.vimeo.com

[tekkie]

looks pretty good for 60 bucks a year :) thanks for the link

[aussieskier]

I'll definitely second Vimeo, loads better than Youtube!

[osv]

youtube 720p blows vimeo 720p out of the water:
1)better codec: h.264 vs. flash vp6
2)you can embed youtube video, but it will have the logo on the vid
3)youtube is vbr, vimeo is cbr, which takes up more bandwidth
4)youtube records at ~25% higher bandwidth than vimeo does
5)vimeo can't do more than 24fps, youtube can do 30fps

[osv]

compare it for yourself, both of these vids were encoded from the same source video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hxua4ALWHms&fmt=22
http://www.vimeo.com/2431829

notice how the vimeo panning and zooming in stutters, while the youtube version isn't nearly as bad... that's because vimeo can't handle 30p, it drops frames to make it 24p.

i play this stuff back on a 24" crt, not an lcd; the youtube h.264 scaling is better than the vimeo flash scaling.

[pr0digal]

compare it for yourself, both of these vids were encoded from the same source video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hxua4ALWHms&fmt=22Video
http://www.vimeo.com/2431829

notice how the vimeo panning and zooming in stutters, while the youtube version isn't nearly as bad... that's because vimeo can't handle 30p, it drops frames to make it 24p.

i play this stuff back on a 24" crt, not an lcd; the youtube h.264 scaling is better than the vimeo flash scaling.

From those two videos, the vimeo one looks far supreme as far as quality. Also, what if he decides to shoot in 24p? Then he will have the problem (when uploading to youtube) of it combining frames causing some very interesting problems. The youtube video does not look anywhere close to 720p, but the Vimeo one does

Sadly, there is little to do about the 24p/30p problem...at least it isn't trying to go from 24p to 30i..that would be kiler

[osv]

the youtube clip has much better picture quality than the vimeo clip, the bitrate numbers prove it... and it doesn't have that horrible stuttering that you get with vimeo.

i believe that youtube will encode 25p if it's pal, but i've never tried to upload ntsc 25p.

[darosk]

youtube 720p blows
Uh-huh uh-huh.

[BJWOK]

the youtube clip has much better picture quality than the vimeo clip, the bitrate numbers prove it... and it doesn't have that horrible stuttering that you get with vimeo.

i believe that youtube will encode 25p if it's pal, but i've never tried to upload ntsc 25p.

champ, that youtube clip looks rubbish compared to vimeo one. forget the numbers, take a look at it!

[hawkeye60]

I agree the Youtube looks like crap compared to Vimeo. Regardless of the specs, I use Vimeo all the time, it simply looks better.

[osv]

tell ya what... how about if i try and make this real simple, maybe give you still guys something that you can relate to? tell me which frame grab came from vimeo:

http://www.codectest.com/productreviews/vimeovsyoutube/vimeovsyoutubecomparison.jpg

[BJWOK]

the bottom one

[danskim]

Your clip on YouTube doesn't have the link "watch in high quality" that other YouTube HD videos I've seen. And that's why it looks terrible I think.

[osv]

the bottom one

nope

the one on top, the bad frame grab, is from the vimeo clip.

you can duplicate that for yourself by downloading the vimeo video, and grabbing the first frame of the video.

[osv]

Your clip on YouTube doesn't have the link "watch in high quality" that other YouTube HD videos I've seen. And that's why it looks terrible I think.

now i see why you guys are saying that, the youtube link that i posted was wrong, for some reason the word "Video" was added at the end of the link, lets try it again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hxua4ALWHms&fmt=22

[hawkeye60]

Well that's better.

[osv]

sorry for the confusion!

[BJWOK]

might want to check those facts next time champ!

hard to make a valid call without the correct links :)

[danskim]

Yeah, big improvement with the new link, and it does seem that YouTube has better streaming HD quality.

But Vimeo seems to let people download the original file in 1080p (if applicable), so that would be useful to a lot of people.

[ocmip]

Go with a VPS.

[typethree]

Thanks for the useful tips!

[mellofelow]

Ummm... I just watch both and YouTube is better... by far. For some reason, it started small and expanded into a larger screen.

However, looks like YouTube is more bandwidth intensive. My line is 3mb and the buffer was barely ahead.

Thanks for the tip.

[tcats14]

Your clip on YouTube doesn't have the link "watch in high quality" that other YouTube HD videos I've seen. And that's why it looks terrible I think.

Neat trick is to type &fmt=18 EXAMPLE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT11GGD7qlI&FMT=18

it will basically reload the video in the best quality..

I think others who have posted links seem to type &fmt=22 so either way your getting better quality but most videos now on youtube seem to have HD Setting..

[blackwhitephotos]

My HD videos on YouTube i think better than Vimeo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byAd--jV2wk