Vegas 8k voucoder render not able to reload back into vegas ...why?

Stephen-Shelton wrote on 11/29/2021, 3:05 PM

Hi. I'm doing 8k renders from vegas 18 pro and (due to great previous support from this forum) was able to render out using Voucoder. It does seem to be temperamental (or something about settings I don't understand) but I have done renders in voucoder that I have been able, in the recent past, to reload back into vegas to render out from 4k to make a check renders that play on windows (I'm doing 360 video here, getting something that plays back 8k 360 is also a major problem). I have also played these renders on a VR set up I have on another PC. I recently have done a new mp4 render in voucoder using H,264 codec, using their general purpose settings with with nothing else ticked or changed other than constant rate factor set at 17 (which I've seen in YT vids as recommended best setting). Vegas error message comes up '{filename} could not be loaded' - file info in jpeg attachedhere

The original veg file takes about 30 mins to load and about 4hrs to render, so it's a pain to keep experimenting with settings over. I have changed some of the vegas default settings following tips from 'Josh at Scrapyard films' and they are shown in the images attached.

I have loaded and played back this very same file in my VR set up, and it works fine, very nice in fact, so the file is not corrupt. So I wondered if anyone could give me any clues as to what is going wrong, why an 8k voucoder mp4 vegas render might not reload back into vegas pro 18?

Many thanks. Steve

i9 32Gb ram Nvidia RTX5000 card

Back to post

Comments

Musicvid wrote on 11/30/2021, 12:29 AM

Stephen, I really enjoyed your videos on Youtube! I am decidedly oldschool, and never learned 360 animation, so you've got it all over me there.

I've been on different incarnations of this forum for nineteen years, almost as long as my tenure in education. In that time, I've encountered a lot of reluctant learners, and you are obviously not among them. There is a reason they put old teachers out to pasture at age 64-1/2, not the least being patience.

It is almost impossible for newer editors to separate the wheat from the chaff on a public forum, and if being direct accomplishes some purpose in that regard, it is a fault I've been told I may have to live with.

I have plenty of R&D projects to keep me busy this season, and maybe after the holidays you can help me understand what's behind those wonderfully dreamy videos. If you are able to stream 3+ hours or more, perhaps with Solfeggio audio tracks, that is definitely marketable and revenue-producing on YT, something I'll always support. Until then...

Stephen-Shelton wrote on 11/30/2021, 12:58 AM

MusicVid - thank you so much, that's very kind of you to say that, never thought you'd even look at my videos. I'm still on a steep learning curve with them. This one, out hopefully this week (loading up to youtube as we speak ...now I have been able to watch and check the final render ...big part thanks to you!) I hope is another level up ...but still some way to go yet! I guess you must see so many of the same of questions and basic mistakes from us learners, which must try anyone's patience. I do always try and research stuff, lots, before I ever come on here and I ask, what must sometimes seem like, a dumbly worded question and bother the experts.

As for the Solfeggio type vids, that's really interesting, again thank you. I could easily do long videos of calming fractal morphing shapes and put synth/moog tracks to it, but never thought there was a market for it, loads out there already; although some of the vids have millions of views, so I should have put 2 and 2 together - but ironically I have recently starting planning a morphing fractal video but was only thinking of about 5-6mins length - maybe I need to think bigger 😄 It's my music I've always put first, the entry into video making was purely to help the music get heard, although I now see them on equal footing. My heart is in doing quirky stuff, which of course instantly puts it miles away from 'popular' but I'm a very happy bunny doing them all the same. I have found there is a bit of a market in fairies and the like. LOTRs sort of thing - fantasy escapism I guess, without the need to go shooting or killing anything! - so that's my current target and pleasure. I use mandelbulber for the fractal landscapes and DAZ studio for the characters - then drop into Vegas to put it all together ...not always that brilliantly with the latter lol!

So music vid - can I assume you make videos for your music?

Former user wrote on 11/30/2021, 1:55 AM

So, if I can pester you again. what would be the best format to render in to upload into youtube? Would there be a difference given youtube compresses it, whatever, with its VP09 codec or would the HVEC option somehow give better results?

One thing I did notice is that YouTube is only encoding your 8K version in AV1, which means only a small percentage can watch in 8K smoothly, and that's not very good for 360 videos which need a tonne of resolution to not be pixelated. I have seen other videos with 8K VP9 which has the wider compatibility. The good thing though is with the video I saw you're encoding at 30fps, so those without AV1 GPU decoders that have a good enough CPU should be able to play smoothly, 60fps I would think not.

As for MAKING YouTube create an 8K VP9, maybe there's a trick, but probably 8K VP9 is only on older 8K videos or very popular 8K videos

Stephen-Shelton wrote on 11/30/2021, 2:34 AM

Todd-b oh blimey, wow (again). I have no prior knowledge to stuff like that ...here's a ton of questions! 😄 So what does encoding my 8k version in AV1 mean? I haven't realised it was even in AV1 format 😄, do I get a choice over that anywhere? why only a small % see it smoothy, is that because of file size? How do I get it into a better format (I assume from how it's renders out of Vegas as I don't get any choice uploading to youtube?) and what are the better formats I could target. Obviously I want as best viewing quality and accessibility as I can get (hence 8k is the max I can do atm). I've not read anything about VP9 encoding in AV1. All I've come across as advice is render your uplaod as best as poss as YT VP9 will compress in its own way whatever. Glad you said about 30 fps v 60 fps as that was my thinking in doing them. No doubt in 10 years time I might be thinking otherwise but hey! I'm sort of panic asking as my video is processing atm. If I thought I could upload a better to watch version I'd delete that one before it was public and reload another. Thank you so much for taking an interest to help and educate me.

Stephen-Shelton wrote on 11/30/2021, 2:55 AM

soz that was a bit of a rushed panic response as uploading an 8k atm. I had seen the VP09 had been used for the hi res but didn't think the 8k would be any different to the 4k, nothing in youtube help text I saw mentioned it, but as you have pointed out the 8k is in AV1. I have since tried to hurriedly read up on it and it seems youtube are choosing to do this to better compress (in size) the video over VP09? All I've ever known is I found out that if you post in 4k you trigger the better codec of VP09 over the AVC basic codec and it makes the standard HD video quality much better too. I had no idea about AV1. 8k stutters on my playback from youtube, and I have pretty good bandwidth but the 4k plays fine, which supports what you are saying. I am slightly confused. If AV1 compresses more to save bandwidth why doesn't it play back better than VP09 (or playback more smoothly?). I create at 8k to make the whole 360 sphere, the idea being that the frame you see in a particular direction is then 4k (is that right?). So surely 8k on youtube is overdoing the 360, as you are only viewing one 4k aspect of it in frame at the any moment? ...or does youtube resolution options take that into account and 8k means the whole 360 sphere? yours, confused!! but extremely curious 🙂

Musicvid wrote on 11/30/2021, 3:02 AM

I use mandelbulber for the fractal landscapes

That I will check out! Mandelbrot iterations and I are old friends.

Stephen-Shelton wrote on 11/30/2021, 3:12 AM

Musicvid - hey I can give something back here!! Mandelbulber is my choice for several reasons. 1) It renders in openCL (on the GPU) whereas its main 3D fractal 'rival' Mandelbulb3d only uses CPU. CPU can do double point stuff, so go into more detail, however you can switch mandelbulber to this option as well if you want (and have the time to wait for the render!). The GPU render for fractals is sooo much faster, way way faster than CPU. 2) mandelbulber is being continuously developed, new releases all the time, whereas the (oddly) more used mandelbulb3D isn't any more (I gather) 3) the support for mandelbulber is excellent and extremely friendly and helpful. the best place to go is the very active mandelbulber facebook page. The admin is brilliant and the developers are also active posters, so all your question get answered by the best. They also post fractal images and give the settings so you can copy and learn and develop. 🙂

Stephen-Shelton wrote on 11/30/2021, 5:10 AM

todd-b - hi, just to say my 8k video has uploaded and been processed (surprisingly quick compare to some of my uploads) and for reasons I have no understanding of the 8k option has VP09 codec showing in the stats for nerds. It all looks great I have to say although my www is not streaming the 8k properly it looked fine in 4k. I shall release it in a day or two after a bit of PR on my 'Nepenthes Sloth' facebook page first. Thank you for all the insights and info though, I really found it all very interesting 🙂

Former user wrote on 11/30/2021, 5:11 AM

So what does encoding my 8k version in AV1 mean? I haven't realised it was even in AV1 format 😄, do I get a choice over that anywhere? why only a small % see it smoothy, is that because of file size? How do I get it into a better format (I assume from how it's renders out of Vegas as I don't get any choice uploading to youtube?) and what are the better formats I could target.

AV1 is very highly compressed video, at lower resolutions often a CPU can handle the video fine, but at FHD and above you want a GPU decoder to take the strain off the cpu as decoding via cpu take a lot of processing. The problem is only the newest GPU cards, phones and media players support GPU decoding of AV1. AV1 is the highest quality video quality that YouTube uses so that's a bonus but the negative is at 8K without GPU decoding it will be a problem for many. VP9 has been around for many years and most devices support GPU decoding, at 1440p and higher YT only encodes in VP9 or AV1. I do think 60fps would suit this format of video, but playback problem for many if AV1 encode is at 8K. You could consider it future proofing, those that can't playback the 8K AV1 now can play the 4K VP9 instead

I had a look at your last 2 videos, the 8K resolution they play at is slightly different, 1 only plays in AV1, the other only plays in VP9

(AV1 - resolution 7680x4096)

(VP9 - resolution 8192 x 4096)

If you uploaded at those 2 different resolutions that could be the key or shear coincidence.

todd-b - hi, just to say my 8k video has uploaded and been processed (surprisingly quick compare to some of my uploads) and for reasons I have no understanding of the 8k option has VP09 codec showing

YouTubes moves in mysterious ways. That's great news

Stephen-Shelton wrote on 11/30/2021, 5:29 AM

ok that is really interesting. I just checked my originals that I uploaded as those resolution differences seemed wrong. They were both created and uploaded at 8192 x 4096 res. 360 degree has to be 2:1 ratio. Now I'm really confused!! It's like the AV1 has altered the resolution/frame dimensions. I've just checked my latest uploaded file, the 8k VP09 is at 8192 x 4096 which is what it was loaded up at.