newbie question

JohnCK wrote on 7/2/2012, 11:19 PM
Friends,

Nothing worse than a newbie question, but here is my problem.

Just registered Vegas HD to do home videos off a Cannon Powershot. Saves to the *.mov format.

Work is to sync a pro level audio file with the cheap condenser mic in the camera, replacing the camera audio. Resolution of the video is 1280X720 at 29.97 fps.

No problem with the audio, but the video uploads to YouTube with some choppiness. This has to be in the conversion process since the original mov file is fairly smooth (YouTube choppiness not related to download bandwidth).

Also noted that rendering the file with replaced audio to the mov format results in a very degraded video when rendered to the same computer disc. This is a bit distressing.

Question is what the best method of saving or rendering from the native camera mov format would cause the least deterioration in the video if uploading to YouTube. Do I convert to wmv on the hard disc which seems to be least destructive or render directly from the project with some optimized setting.

Thank you in advance,

John K

Comments

musicvid10 wrote on 7/2/2012, 11:58 PM
You've asked several unrelated questions.

Youtube converts to their standard bitrate. Playback smoothness depends entirely on your computer's CPU, Flash Player version, connection speed, and to a lesser extent, your video card..

You have not provided any of your media or render properties. Thus it is impossible to determine what may be causing any quality issues you may or may not be having. In any event, wmv is not your "least destructive" option.

Syncing an independent audio track to video without the benefit of genlock presents its own set of special considerations; any sync errors may be compounded by Youtube's processing limitations. Pluraleyes does a great job of syncing external audio in Vegas Pro, but is not available to work with your version.

If you would like some tested methods of producing video in Vegas that will maximize Youtube's processing capabilities, perhaps you will find some guidance from our video tutorial.

JohnCK wrote on 7/3/2012, 9:22 AM
Musicvid,

Thanks for your response. Will get back with more specifics, and go through the tutorial. Again, have no problem at all with audio sync and replacement. This works excellent and why I got the program to begin with. Just have to work out some minor deterioration in the video quality. Up til last week my entire life experience with video was single shots with a Polaroid, so still in the beginning of the learning curve

best,
John
JohnCK wrote on 7/6/2012, 11:52 PM
Friends, Musicvid,

Followup please on my initiation into this realm

I’m probably 10% less ignorant than when I first posted, but facing some blocks I’m respectfully requesting help with. Up to a couple weeks ago my entire video experience was a Polaroid black and white still (the one you had to wait a minute before it ejected the hard copy).

The video tutorial advised by Musicvid put me in the right direction regarding YouTube upload, although it looks like the “better� rendering method using external codecs is not an option in HD Studio entry level. Bummer.

Musicvid mentioned that wmv is not the least destructive conversion from the native mov format, although I’m getting about equal artifacts with mp4 conversion from my 720p mov original. Is there a better option you would advise for least video deterioration? Choppiness and streaky banding in fine detail are my main struggles. These artifacts are minimal to acceptable in the mov file before conversion. That’s where things go downhill.

From the video tutorial, even if the direct render to YouTube is available, the workflow advised to first render to mp4 and then upload. Do we lose some quality in the direct to YouTube upload so that we should not use the native direct render function.

Where I have found a dismal conversion quality is in the mov to mov rendering. Idea was to take the Cannon mov video, replace the audio and resave to mov, ignorantly thinking that the video would sail above video conversion, simply replace the audio and retain the original mov quality. The mov to mov conversion is about the worst result. Audio is fine, but video is fractured beyond redemption even at the highest quality settings. Obviously something I am doing wrong.

Advice is appreciated. Getting there (slowly…)

John K
Chienworks wrote on 7/7/2012, 6:40 AM
Quality is MUCH more dependent on the bitrate used than on the codec or container. Any of those formats can produce a good quality output with a high enough bitrate. This is probably the single biggest issue that "newbies" overlook. Since you haven't mentioned the word, i'm guessing you're overlooking it too.

Horrible: wmv @ 256kbps, mp4 @ 256kbps, mov @ 256kbps

Good: wmv @ 6000kbps, mp4 @ 6000kbps, mov @ 6000kbps
musicvid10 wrote on 7/7/2012, 9:36 AM
"it looks like the better rendering method using external codecs is not an option in HD Studio entry level. Bummer."

The tutorial was written for Vegas Movie Studio Platinum. You may not have the custom render options in HD Studio, a cut-down version that was released after our tutorial was published. After installing the codecs and restarted Vegas Movie Studio Platinum, they are available as a MOV custom video format.
http://www.jazzythedog.com/testing/dnxhd/hd-guide.aspx#DNxHD

To look at Kelly's point about bitrate from another angle, different codecs perform differently at a given bitrate, with x264 being the best we have tested at sane bitrates for web delivery. The nature of interframe compression is that stills may look visually perfect at 250 kbps, but high detail in motion may need 250,000 kbps to keep from falling apart.
http://www.jazzythedog.com/testing/lowbitrate.htm

At a given average bitrate and resolution, compressed video in motion using wmv or other solutions (even h264) are visually more destructive than x264. So, at 1-4 mbps abr, (wmv, other mp4, mov = horrible), and (x264 = acceptable).

These differences tend to become less as the given average bitrate goes up, which is another way of saying that x264 uses compression more efficiently than wmv or just about anything else.
http://www.jazzythedog.com/testing/dnxhd/hd-guide.aspx#LBR
http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/h264_2011/
JohnCK wrote on 7/7/2012, 11:29 AM
Chienworks, Musicvid,

Thanks for the info and links. Been in music engineering for decades but not video and it didn't occur to think about video bitrate. Was thinking framerate and pixel resolution as the major factors, so this is starting to make sense. Will have to study these links and get educated.

Best,
John
JohnCK wrote on 7/7/2012, 7:32 PM
Followup.

Tried the Platinum trial which doesn't exactly follow the tutorial in the recent version, but enough to piece the concepts together. The conversion and upload does a much better job using Avid and Handbreak external codecs.

Think I can take it forward from here. Thank you guys again for the pointed relevant info and quick guidance. Guess we are all newbies at something along the road and need experienced advice before we can get kicked out of the nest.

Best to all of you,

Dr John
musicvid10 wrote on 7/7/2012, 11:22 PM
Thanks for following up; we aim to please.

I started in the music industry over forty years ago (AFM, ASCAP, BMI,. you get the drift). Although I had the advantage of a career in still photography (my day job), I still found the transition to digital and video later in life to be a leap of confidence. Best of luck.