ha ha ha welcome to video lol there is a reson why the good ones are in the gigabites :) its a catch 22 though it looks like crap when its a small size but nobody can afford/can be bothered with downloading somthen that is a gig or more.
most people however just acept that for the moment atleast online video is pretty crap but they get over it
Opinions are like a-holes everyone has one, the only one that does you any good is yours and all that comes out is shit
Yep, welcome to video. I did some projects my senior year in school that were huge. I was shooting with a Canon XL-1 [drool] and the quality was awesome. But I had to put this videos in a multimedia presentation, and some were even hidden features (one of which was a recreation of the printer-beating in Office Space ). All this had to fit on a CD for distribution, so it could not be too big. I started with original cuts that were about 500 megs for a minute or two, and that was at half or less of the quality the camera was capable of. After snipping, rendering, and compressing I got a cut I was satisfied with at about 70 megs. That stuff is intense, as can be shown by rendering time. Queue up your stuff, hit render, and then go get dinner, check back in a few hours. I know AggieDave and I have both done this several times.
So my best advice for video in general, and I think most will agree: 1. Decide how much space you are willing to use. 2. Use the best codec you can possibly use for your purpose, ie interplatform, web, etc 3. Edit quality until you squeeze just under your size limit
I have just recently been finding out that Streaming Windows Media format (.WMV) works really good. It is a highly compressed format that looks and sounds really good. I have a couple vids encoded with that and they look pretty sharp. A two minute (384Kb @ 30 FPS) ) movie is just under 5MB.
The tricky part was getting it to play on the web. I had to "copy" another sites video link page, and then I just inserted my video filename in where theirs was.