via a proper ISP (aa.net.uk) which makes all the difference.
That’s the same one whose “30mbit” link delivered about 8 earlier 
Amazing. I’ve never had so much as a dropped packet with them and get my max line speed 24×7. Not even any slowdowns at the typical 1800-2100 problem time. You need to speak to them and get it sorted.
Could be crappy equipment, a line fault or a saturated link at the exchange. They are quite literally the most responsive and enthusiastic bunch of people you could ever wish to deal with – you should engage with them and get it sorted.
Are you sure your line wasn’t being used for other things? Why don’t you check out the CQM graph in your control panel.
At the risk of driving this even more off topic, let me tell you that I don’t watch videos at work – because for 50 quid a month A&A give us the absolutely massive download allowance of, wait for it, 6 (six) gigabytes! Why do we use them? Because they offer a 3G backup, self activating at ADSL failure plus 2 minutes, and we get a lot of ADSL failures here (UK countryside). One lightning hit melted the BT cables for a week. All the fixed IPs we have auto switch to the 3G connection, too, so all the server stuff works, albeit slowly. Also uploads are totally unmetered, which comes in, ahem, very handy
But this is not relevant to the Q of where to host a 25mbits/sec video. Sure there will always be people who cannot watch it, but there are always people who cannot watch something. Almost nobody in the UK can watch a 4K video from a £300 action cam (100mbit/sec). I think the UK is especially backward… but the people who will claim great speeds tend to be the ones who have it, and most of them are in big cities (Brighton gets 100megs down, 20 up, on a good day).
@Stevelup – I replaced that Oban landing file with one which was rendered as 1080P 12-50mbits/sec. The Vimeo setting was still 720P. Whether it is actually VBR I don’t know, and I don’t know if Vimeo does any more with it than the previous one. The original file, 367MB, is here and it looks good to me. The camera itself was set to 25mbits/sec however. It will do 50 but a 128GB card will hold 5.5hrs then.
Yes, that looks way better than the ‘original’ clip that I downloaded from Vimeo the first time round.
I can also confirm that Vimeo does not bugger around with the ‘original’ copy either – the download button now presents that much improved video file (and untouched).
So maybe there is your answer – if viewers want the best possible quality, they need to ‘download’ the clip instead. Frustratingly, Vimeo don’t quite serve these files quickly enough to watch them without buffering…
% Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed100 358M 100 358M 0 0 2587k 0 0:02:22 0:02:22 -:-:— 1671k
It took 2:22 to download your 2:12 long clip. To watch it in real time, you have to pause it for about 30 seconds at the front end. This obviously isn’t practical for longer videos.
Davids test file came down quicker with his 25 second clip downloading in 15 seconds:-
% Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed100 50.9M 100 50.9M 0 0 3406k 0 0:00:15 0:00:15 -:-:— 3508k
Your file definitely remained untouched by Vimeo though:-
MD5 (oban-landing-vimeo.mp4) = cbee44a76ff14fd2b231417fcd26a745
MD5 (oban-landing.mp4) = cbee44a76ff14fd2b231417fcd26a745
Steve
That’s really interesting, since I originally uploaded a 720P file, but later replaced it with a 1080P file (same bitrate), yet I did not change Vimeo’s playback size of 720P.
I also checked that Vegas’s “AVC” render codec is same as H264 which is what Vimeo wants.
So why is the new Vimeo-playback file better?
The render settings differed only in 720P v. 1080P. The bitrate was 12-50mbits/sec. I wonder what your media analyser app shows for the two files?
Lots of storage, lots of bandwidth, cheap. Pick two.
Peter wrote:
So why is the new Vimeo-playback file better?
Sorry, I wasn’t clear. I was referring to the quality of the ‘original’ file. Vimeo still does a nasty re-encode on the ‘playback’ version.
You should always upload the best possible quality file you can so as to avoid artefacts being caused by double-compression. They actually recommend that you upload Apple ProRes files… but good luck doing that with UK broadband infrastructure, and I’m not sure you can export those from Vegas anyway.
Peter wrote:
I wonder what your media analyser app shows for the two files?
I didn’t analyse anything – just checked that the two files were the same. This was to see if Vimeo was somehow butchering your original file. It isn’t, it’s only butchering the ‘playback’ ones.
The problem prior to your latest upload was that the originally uploaded file already had compression artefacts in it, which Vimeo then made even worse.
For a short clip, why don’t you try uploading something at an insanely high bitrate. Perhaps just the last 20 seconds of the Oban video as the runway texture really shows up problems.
I don’t have any original material above 25mbits/sec.
The camera can do 1080P at 50mbits/sec and I might try that sometime. It will do 100mbits/sec at 4k but only 30fps which then produces a rather poor video for stuff which is moving. Though most likely editing 4k in Vegas would produce a reasonable 1080P result. 4k to 4k is not much good because the lens correction process needs cropping which will need pixel replication unless rendering at a lower res.
