What would be the best format for my renders.

ingeborgdot wrote on 9/23/2014, 5:13 PM
We do projects in class and then we play them back on our school channel. No projects are actually made into DVD or Bluray. We just create them in as HD as possible to keep the high quality and then render to HD formats. My question for you is what is the best format to render to. We will be putting these on Schooltube also so I was wondering what would be the best overall format to use? Thanks.


Steve Mann wrote on 9/23/2014, 5:21 PM
Why don't you ask Schooltube?

larry-peter wrote on 9/23/2014, 5:26 PM
Hi ingeborgdot. Check out this link: https://help.schooltube.com/forums/44034-Videos There is a bit of incorrect info here - i.e. they refer to "360p" as the "bitrate."

From what I gather, an mp4 would be a good format for Schooltube, with a pixel height of greater than 360, because that's what it will be downconverted to. There appears to be a limit of 1.5 gig for a video, so keep that in mind. My suggestion would be to submit a 720p with a bitrate of around 5Mb/sec. I believe there are some templates in MainConcept AVC/AAC that are close to this. Make sure to render at the same frame rate used in your project (and hopefully, your source footage). Good luck.
ingeborgdot wrote on 9/23/2014, 5:41 PM
We have not used schooltube yet and if their formats are that low then I will use YouTube instead to put our projects on. I want 1080P if possible. YouTube or Schooltube are our least concerns for render. It is our School channel I am more concerned about right now. I want the best HD that would work for YouTube and our school channel. The way we play back the video is on a computer that plays it back in Windows Media Player. Does this make sense?
musicvid10 wrote on 9/23/2014, 7:02 PM
720p is better because it won't be pushing your school network or computers.
ingeborgdot wrote on 9/23/2014, 9:54 PM
The computer I have for this is an AMD A10-5800K Quad core with an R7-265 video card. I don't think anything will push it too hard.
musicvid10 wrote on 9/23/2014, 10:36 PM
"The computer

I'm sorry, I thought I was supposed to infer it would be delivered over a school network to student pool computers, either of which are typically underequipped for 1080p streaming.

Guess I read that wrong, but a quad cpu plus an uncluttered 12-15 Mbps connection would seem the minimum for stutter-free 1080p delivery from Youtube. The use of WMP as a (post-download?) player remains a question mark. I've had a lot of experience with this, but if it works for you . . .

720p has been, and remains the most universally playable HD format for Youtube.

ingeborgdot wrote on 9/24/2014, 2:08 PM
Yeah, sometimes ( really a lot of the time) I know what I want to say but don't say it properly. I should have said what it was going to play on. Our school channel actually plays across our whole town on the cable channel so I want as good of a quality picture as possible. So I guess I am wanting to know what the experts would use if you wanted an HD resolution picture. It does not have to be the highest either. In fact I would like to cut down render time somewhat if possible too. So, in other words what would you do? Thanks so much and I hope I didn't leave out too much more info.
And as for WMP that is the default player that plays with the special program we use to run our videos. I really don't know if I can set another player to be the default as I have never tried because WMP has been doing a fine job for 15 years. Is there something else you would suggest? I always am willing to listen.
musicvid10 wrote on 9/24/2014, 3:03 PM
We don't know what the delivery capabilities and formats are, nor the wmp interface, so you'll need to ask them.
I assumed internet, not cable TV delivery.
ingeborgdot wrote on 9/24/2014, 3:44 PM
It is cable TV that we are putting this on. They say no preference for format. Just whatever works for me.
videoITguy wrote on 9/24/2014, 3:57 PM
Your scenario and network make no sense at all. You have cable TV sending a signal on cable to the school system. So the cablecast is video from the headend of the system. You expect to watch it on ordinary computer because the cable is connected to a receiver ? in the computer? in another headend destination point in the school district? I just don't understand this lash-up????

Or are you talking a data channel piggy-backed over the delivery of cable video that is carrying a pure digital signal to what?
ingeborgdot wrote on 9/24/2014, 4:01 PM
We have the computer that sends the video out through a coax into a transformer that sends it through fiber to the main office to send it out to channel 12. Channel 12 goes out to the community and our school and is watched on a TV. Nothing is involved in the internet at all or any network of any sorts.
videoITguy wrote on 9/24/2014, 4:53 PM
Sir, that is all networks! It may not look like a network you are familiar with - but it is a network, in fact several networks. And of course all that you are doing is uploading a digital file across a carrier to a headend - what this does and why it was configured was to save you all time in bicycling DVD's or tapes to the headend.
In the old days cable started with just tape systems at the headend. Now in this century of tech you have another way.

What matters most in this roundabout - what does the headend accept to get across the carrier they have to use to get back to your school on a TV receiver.
ingeborgdot wrote on 9/24/2014, 5:21 PM
You learn something everyday. Thanks. Well, I have been rendering in HD 1080-60i (1920x1080, 29.970 fps) and sending that through because everything we render at this point is at that setting and also the settings on our camcorders. I have sent everything from SD to HD through this and it all works fine.