Video for YouTube

FlashGordon wrote on 10/29/2008, 4:58 PM
I just posted my eighth video on YouTube and was very disappointed by the quality of the video stream. This one was shot on my partner James' camera which is a pretty high end Canon. I rendered as the team at Sony in Wisconsin instructed me to do so creating a MPEG-4 video. Does anyone out there have suggestions as to how I could improve the quality of the streaming video? I look at other people's videos on YT and I've seen worse but I also have seen a lot that are much better. I'd like to have better quality videos posted on my YouTube site. Here's a link to my site if anyone could take the time to check them out and give me some advice. For the record the forty five minute DVD I produced from this evening came out excellent in the MPEG-2 rendering so the quality is there. I'm just losing it I guess when I render to MPEG-4 but that's what I was instructed to do.

Comments

Spot|DSE wrote on 10/29/2008, 5:07 PM
Use the HD content as source.
Render 640 x 480 MPEG 4 using iPod template. Don't letterbox unless necessary.
keep transitions to a minimum/clean.
Handheld video is hard for low-bitrate encoders. Always.
Low light, lacking contrast is hard for encoders. Always
Noisy video (yours is *very* noisy) is hard on encoders. Always.
Zooming is difficult for encoders, and hand-held zooms are very difficult for encoders.
A tripod in this particular shoot would have made all the difference.
he DVD looks good because you are able to have a high bitrate.
Patryk Rebisz wrote on 10/29/2008, 5:30 PM
watch some official music videos posted by big corporations and you will see how bad they look (because of fast cuts and lots of motion-heavy shots). It's youtube so you have to accept crappy quality.
FilmingPhotoGuy wrote on 11/1/2008, 11:37 AM
Don't waste your videos on YouTube. There is a Sony Vegas group at www.vimeo.com. For HD footage try out Vimeo.
flippin wrote on 11/3/2008, 3:09 PM
I certainly agree with every one of Spot's comments; however, I don't completely follow why MPEG 4 was the recommended format for your video.

I've put several 5 - 6 minute videos onto YouTube in the mpeg2 format (shot in SD and edited in Vegas 5), and they look pretty good, IMHO.

Here's a short promo for some sports equipment that I thought came out pretty good (please choose "Watch in High Quality" option):


FilmingPhotoGuy wrote on 11/3/2008, 11:07 PM
I stand corrected. Flippin's YouTube clip is very good. I need to try Spot's settings.

Sorry for trouncing YouTube.

Craig

flippin wrote on 11/4/2008, 7:48 AM
Thanks for your kind words, Craig. YouTube is an interesting phenomenon in some ways, but much of the content that is posted there is so poorly conceived/shot/edited that it can be difficult to clearly separate problems with the original media from YouTube's technical limitations.

FilmingPhotoGuy wrote on 11/4/2008, 10:06 AM
What makes me mad on YouTube is when you look at a tutorial you can't see anything clearly enough to learn anything. But on Vimeo the footage there is really good. As I mentioned before there's a Sony Vegas group there with some good vids to show.

Craig
flippin wrote on 11/4/2008, 11:23 AM
I agree, most YouTube content is simple entertainment (at best). You can choose full screen viewing, but the resolution limitation at YouTube doesn't really make that worthwhile very often.

I'll definitely take a look at Vimeo as per your suggestion.

Konrad wrote on 11/5/2008, 5:17 PM
Do a search here. There are videos on youtube on how to get the best results with vegas. Vimeo is always better but I've got acceptable results uploading a WMV file following the tutorial on youtube.. I know that may be counter intuitive but it works well.