Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
Vimeo replies to criticism of their streaming video quality
  • LPowellLPowell

    I've subscribed to Vimeo Plus for the last 5 years and used it for hosting 1080p videos for website embedding and providing downloads of the original video files to clients. Like YouTube, Vimeo re-encodes uploaded videos for online streaming and supports 720p and 1080p resolutions. I have no complaints about Vimeo's service and customer support, they've always been reliable and conscientious.

    The image quality of Vimeo's streaming videos, however, has to my eyes deteriorated to the point where it is no longer acceptable. It actually makes my work look BAD to my clients' eyes. Here is a short 30-second example, originally encoded at 20Mbps (Blu-ray quality). First the Vimeo version, then YouTube's, be sure your settings allow you to watch each video in full-screen 1080p:

    I also invite those interested to download the original 74MB MP4 video file from that Vimeo page and compare the image quality to these online versions. While the original is obviously much sharper, to my eyes the YouTube version is acceptable while the Vimeo version is unacceptably degraded to the point where it actually looks out of focus.

    I wrote Vimeo asking if their Vimeo Pro service offers any better video quality. Here is an excerpt from their reply:

    There is no difference between the encoding processes for Vimeo Plus and Vimeo PRO. That said, I’m not seeing much of a difference between the version that we’ve encoded and the original file. Have you tried encoding that video at a higher bitrate and then replacing it, to see if that makes a difference? Please give that a shot, and let us know if you’re still not satisfied with the results!

    Is there anyone else who can't see much difference between the original MP4 and that POS?

  • 47 Replies sorted by
  • ManicdManicd

    This is just my opinion. Vimeo, Youtube, and the 18mb file look like poo. Youtube might have look a little better than Vimeo but only because youtube compression tends to add blur which in this case somehow actually makes it look cleaner than vimeo. In my experience vimeo usually feels sharper but not in this case.

  • LPowellLPowell

    Thanks for pointing out the 1080p MP4 downloaded from Vimeo is only 18MB in size, with a 4.5Mbps bitrate. That is significantly lower than the 74MB original video file, which was encoded at 20Mbps. You can download the original 74MB MP4 file here:

    http://www78.zippyshare.com/v/gzJAj86V/file.html

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @LPowell

    I suggest to make good example test video.

    Add it to both services, download both of them and compare using real tools made for H.264 analyzing.

  • ManicdManicd

    Well instead of beating around the bush. Just point that out in the first place.... Espeically when dealing with Vimeo customer service. You want something don't expect people to analyze and double check download numbers and mpbs and your intentions. It's been a long day and I'm many beers deep. So just get to it. ?

    Edit: And yes that is BS that vimeo isn't giving the full size original video that you pay for people to have. That is wrong.

  • LPowellLPowell

    If you download the original MP4 above, you'll see it's a cleanly rendered 1080p video, with stage lighting, exposure, and color balance per client's request. Oversaturated and a bit cartoonish? Yes, to my eyes, but that's what the client wanted and if anything, it should need less bitrate than a subtly textured, more realistic grade would require. And Vimeo can't even handle something as undemanding as this?

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @LPowell

    May be, but make it clear to everyone and show numbers. I know you have brains and skills :-)

  • jjj_ri_usajjj_ri_usa

    Well, it's funny this topic just came up. I uploaded a very large high bitrate file to Vimeo over the weekend and it looks awful. I assumed it was because it is of a swim meet, and that Vimeo's compression mistook the water as 'sky' so decided it could could compress the heck out of it. I can't send a link to the Vimeo clip since it is private. I will only be sharing it with swimmers and their parents (since it was "girls in swimsuits"....)

    I used a very high bitrate since this was from a rented GH4 shot in 4k then rendered to 1080p. I had never shot 4k before so decided to err on the side of 'too high' bitrate.

    The rendered 1080 looks gorgeous on my PC, but, it is 3 GB in size (VBR-Target=50 Mbs, Peak=75 Mbs). It looks like mushy garbage on Vimeo.

    However, I loaded it into YouTube as an unlisted video, and it look really mushy there too.

    But, I did want to point out that when you download from Vimeo, you do have the option to download the ORIGINAL and not the 1080p (which Vimeo encodes at a rather puny bitrate of 4.47 Mbs.)

    The image below shows the data for my last upload. This video on Vimeo looks awful. But, if someone downloads the ORIGINAL (3 GB) it looks nice, but, most swim parents are not going to download such a huge file.

    So, my work around will be to upload a fixed-size (probably 1024 x 576) version to my own website's video player, and allow a VBR of about 7.5 Mbs. I've tested that, and it looks "good enough" (as long as the viewer does not make it full screen!)

    What's funny is I have also been happy with Vimeo's compression in the past. Just now downloaded the 1080p version of an old clip from 2014 that looks great on Vimeo. I was wondering if the VBR was higher back then, but, nope, just the same VBR=4.47 Mbs.

    Snap1.jpg
    493 x 249 - 85K
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @jjj_ri_usa

    Water is not good for low bitrates.

    Also, Vimeo and Youtube constantly optimize encoders cost (usually it is very simple encoders running on big GPU farms). So, bitrate is nothing. You need to know all details from video research.

  • LPowellLPowell

    @jjj_ri_usa

    I did want to point out that when you download from Vimeo, you do have the option to download the ORIGINAL and not the 1080p (which Vimeo encodes at a rather puny bitrate of 4.47 Mbs.)

    This is what I initially assumed as well, but I discovered that after I log out of Vimeo, the Download Original option is no longer available. So Vimeo provides original file download service only to the user who uploaded the file in the first place? /facepalm

    Vimeo's 18MB downloadable 1080p version of my video above is actually not bad, and I wouldn't be complaining if that was what they offered for streaming on their website. I can't compare it directly to what YouTube displays at 1080p, as I can only find a way to download a 720p version from YouTube. Bottom line with Vimeo, however, is that what you upload is not what you either see or download from their site.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @LPowell

    I am really confused. Get software that can store/download streamed video and make proper research.

    What is point in public complains? This guys is business - none of them will do something to make you feel better or make your video look gorgeous. You can just show something and get some attention. But by doing research and showing numbers.

  • ManicdManicd

    Okay so some of this is my fault. When I login, which I have only a free account, I can now see the original file size.

    I downloaded the 74mb file from vimeo and honestly the "viewer experience" quality is not much different to me from the 18mb. I think it's just the perspective of the camera to the stage and stunts that gives the appearance of low quality. There's really nothing you could have done better. Nature of the game I guess? The image quality is fine. It's just perspective that gives low quality feeling. Not meant to be offensive, just saying what I think happened.

  • jjj_ri_usajjj_ri_usa

    (Note: This was a reply to Vitaly's comment about water being tough for low bit rate encoding)...

    Yup, that's probably it. The subject matter of that video was just a few girls surrounded by a lot of water. :-)

    For some later events, I did use a longer focal length focused just on one or two swimmers, so, I expect that those clips will look better on Vimeo/YT?. This first video was more for 'setting the scene' and shows a wide angle with many swimmers during warm ups. But, even the splashes, which are nice and crisply rendered in the original 50 Mbs, are just mush on both Vimeo & YT. The splashes are pretty contrasty, white on blue, but, they turn to greyish mush on both big hosting sites. Oh well, as you say, subject matter is important. In that particular video, almost everything got compressed into mush.

  • LPowellLPowell

    I don't actually care about Vimeo's marketing or website presentation. I already have clients, I just want a reliable online video host they can use to review the footage before downloading the original files. This is what Vimeo claims to provide, but what they actually deliver falls unacceptably short. I'm raising attention to it here because there's a chance someone may have experience with a viable alternative.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @LPowell

    Well, if you make search you will find big number of guys rising attention about Youtube or Vimeo quality.

    How about really make special test video and do everything I said about. At least it gets some chance to be noticed and spread in this case.

  • LPowellLPowell

    @Manicd

    I downloaded the 74mb file from vimeo and honestly the "viewer experience" quality is not much different to me from the 18mb. I think it's just the perspective of the camera to the stage and stunts that gives the appearance of low quality.

    The 18MB 1080p download version is acceptable to my eyes as well, but that is NOT what Vimeo is streaming off their website. Compare what you see when you click on the embedded Vimeo viewer above to the downloaded file displayed locally on your PC. If you can't see a significant degradation there must something drastically different in how Firefox is displaying Vimeo's website on my PC.

  • jjj_ri_usajjj_ri_usa

    @LPowell: For awhile I was using Smugmug to host both videos and photos (I still use them for photos). But, I believe there are some limits on maximum file size for videos.

    But, I love Smugmug for photo hosting. We've tried many photo hosting sites over the years, and I can't recommend Smugmug highly enough.

    If your video clips are as small, like these examples, you might give Smugmug a try? They max out at 1080p.

    http://www.smugmug.com/

  • jjj_ri_usajjj_ri_usa

    @LPowell: Ehhh, now I recall why I stopped using Smugmug for video. It doesn't stream as well as Vimeo. I just went to one of my old videos on Smugmug from 2014. It pauses as it streams very often.

    As a test I then started to stream the Vimeo swim meet video full screen on my other monitor. No pauses at all. Then, to prove it wasn't because it the swim meet video was already cached, I started to stream a very old 1080p Vimeo clip from several years ago. Again, no pauses; while the Smugmug video clip pauses a lot.

    So...though I love Smugmug for photos...they probably are NOT a good choice for videos.

  • bleach551bleach551

    @LPowell,

    I don't know if you have already done this, but have you gone to "Settings" then "Video File" then "Upgrade this video" and selected "720p". 1080p looks better but it starts and stop a lot.

  • LPowellLPowell

    @bleach551 Yes, I have tried both 720p and 1080p re-encoding options on Vimeo's site. As expected, the 1080p version displayed in the embedded Vimeo player window above looks better than their 720p version.

  • bleach551bleach551

    @LPowell,

    At what "Profile" and "Level" are you rendering your H.264 files. I always use "Profile-(High)" "Level-(5.1)" and render at max bit depth and with "Target" and "Max" Mbps at "80". I always use the Standard H.264 instead of H.264 for Blu-ray.

  • bleach551bleach551

    @LPowell,

    Here is a sample clip I uploaded a few days ago on Vimeo to check to see if I could improve the quality and playback.

    It's a Cinema 4k clip transcoded to a 2K ProRes 4444 clip in Compressor and placed on a ProRes 4444 timeline in Adobe premiere with the H.264 settings above. I uploaded the 2k ProRes clip to Vimeo.

  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    This is what I initially assumed as well, but I discovered that after I log out of Vimeo, the Download Original option is no longer available. So Vimeo provides original file download service only to the user who uploaded the file in the first place? /facepalm

    Um, I just downloaded it (~74Mb). Honestly, I didn't see any real problems in what was streamed (OSX Mavericks, Chrome), but I will tell you this, your browser and OS effect how you see Vimeo streams. On the same system I've seen totally different quality from the same stream between Safari and Chrome. Encoding settings for one can look completely awful in another (the problem I ran into was image break up at scene changes).

    My biggest problem with Vimeo is their ability to serve up streams without buffering. It doesn't seem to matter where I access them from, I get buffering problems with Vimeo as much as used to be expected from Youtube.

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    Yeah, same here. YouTube plays, Vimeo delays.

  • bleach551bleach551

    @matt_gh2,

    I uploaded the above clip to both Youtube and Vimeo. And like you said the Vimeo clip delayed and the Youtube clip played. However, Atleast under the Safari browser I use, the colors where much closer to the original clip in Vimeo than Youtube.So I deleted the Youtube upload.

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    @bleach551 Interesting about colors. I've noticed a difference with colors in the past projects I've done. I just use YouTube and play with color correction until it looks good, because uninterrupted playback is more important to me.

Add a Comment