What settings do you guys use to render your files on YouTube?

Boxing Fanatix said:
I'm getting horrible results. Here's a test video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=591ye6BEh2M

I didn't change the resolution, but it still won't fit the full screen. Do any of you guys the exact size of the new youtube resolution?

Also, I convert to wmv, what's better? Wmv. or mov?

I'm using Sony Vegas, if that helps.
Click to expand...

I always scale to 720p or 1080p and use MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 (at a bitrate of about 5 Mb/s, since Youtube will recompress it to about 2 Mb/s for 720p or about 3.5 Mb/s for 1080p) because you get better bitrates that way when Youtube recompresses it compared to SD video.

(and leave "pillarbox" bars on the sides if the original is meant to be 4:3)
 
Admiral Ackbar said:
I always scale to 720p or 1080p and use MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 (at a bitrate of about 5 Mb/s, since Youtube will recompress it to about 2 Mb/s for 720p or about 3.5 Mb/s for 1080p) because you get better bitrates that way when Youtube recompresses it compared to SD video.

(and leave "pillarbox" bars on the sides if the original is meant to be 4:3)
Click to expand...
It won't mess with the pixels if I decide to upscale with SD video?
 
Boxing Fanatix said:
It won't mess with the pixels if I decide to upscale with SD video?
Click to expand...

I found that any reduction in quality caused by scaling (which I didn't find appreciable) was outweighed by the improvement in compression quality.

Also, if you can choose the audio codec as well, Youtube recompresses to ~200 kb/s AAC for HD video if I remember correctly so I would use stereo (or mono depending on your project) AAC at 256 or 320 kb/s.
 
ryvac said:
make sure you shoot in squeez mode.
I shot this squeez and exported out as 1280x720 so it fits the full screen on youtube.
that's what I did for this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpL9S1lxr7U
Click to expand...

Shooting in squeeze isn't necessary if you are scaling to HD resolutions, you could just shoot 4:3 and crop in post. The main advantage of squeeze mode is that it is faster to make anamorphic SD video (such as for 16:9 DVD-Video).
 
Admiral Ackbar said:
Shooting in squeeze isn't necessary if you are scaling to HD resolutions, you could just shoot 4:3 and crop in post. The main advantage of squeeze mode is that it is faster to make anamorphic SD video (such as for 16:9 DVD-Video).
Click to expand...


No, you'd absolutely want to shoot Squeeze if you're going to uprez to HD. It gives you higher quality than any 4:3 crop in post. It's not just about getting there faster; it's actually better.

Shoot squeeze, and if progressive, THIN vertical detail frequency.
 
David Jimerson said:
No, you'd absolutely want to shoot Squeeze if you're going to uprez to HD. It gives you higher quality than any 4:3 crop in post. It's not just about getting there faster; it's actually better.

Shoot squeeze, and if progressive, THIN vertical detail frequency.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that shooting squeeze with the DVX100/A/B camcorders results in the camera internally "cropping and stretching" the 4:3 image from the sensor into an anamorphic image on the tape/output.
 
It does, but it does 1) by hardware, and 2) pre-processing (before compression, before color sampling). If you shoot 4:3 and crop/uprez later, you're doing the same thing, by software, and with 5 times less picture information and 4 times less color information than the camera uses when it does the crop/stretch internally.

Squeeze is better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top