Frage von maozetung:
Hello,
Problem of
creating of video with the quality of "normal quality watch." Since December 2008 showing Youtube in HQ for HD 720p.
So far so good.
For SD - quality (720x576), I have a problem with the normal quality. I have mp4 to H.246 at 640x360 and 25 frames transcoded (from avi file 720x576).
In view high quality "the quality is super, in" normal quality "quite bad.
How do I get the quality. both as good as new Bruce Springsteen http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=113kJKz2mMI?
Who what?
Thank you!
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
That should be good? Uh ... So da gibts ja mal still significant increase opportunities.
I invite SD stuff in principle 720x400 with H.264 at about 2 Mbps high, and this looks better than your link.
Antwort von maozetung:
Thanks for the tip.
Which program do you prefer?
I use Sorenson and TEMPGEnc.
There are and always get in trouble with the ratio 16:9 ... why?
What Frame Rate and Key Frame for Youtube s.Besten?
Antwort von maozetung:
I have tried .. so far there were no good results and with 720x400 with H.264 + 2 Mbps in normal view on YouTube ...
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
Mei Yes, but if it works for me, and although always! The sound with AAC and should not be less 80 set plays a role synonymous. If the picture well and the sound is bad, the option "watch in high quality" is not synonymous.
I compressed with Compressor (Mac).
MB
Antwort von maozetung:
mhm, what is not true with my avi file? I admit that at first with 720x576 (16:9) from Microsoft .... avi
I then unpack them in with Sorenson H.246 and I was in Youtube for "high quality" sharp picture, in the "normal" it is very bad. i am stupid?
Antwort von tommyb:
If your video is a complex, so complex content such as image noise, a lot of movement, etc. then you get yourself on Youtube in High Quality Picture no sound. They have their limits synonymous.
With your workflow, you're certainly not as bad this time, but I would recommend you not to take h264 and AAC is not synonymous, but the good old VirtualDub.
As in side you have your AVI pure, go to Filters and add the following:
Resize filter (720x400)
Temporal Smoother (3)
sharpen (6-12 depending on the feeling)
Then you komprimierst the video with XviD (Video -> Compression).
For XviD ask the following set in the main window:
Then click on "more" in profile @ Level
Then to "Zone Options"
and finally on "more" for "quality preset"
(Trellist must RAUS)
Then go to Audio -> Compression (prior to full processing agencies) and komprimierst your sound with MP3 at 192kbit. If your MP3 codec only max. 56kbit available, then please take care of you around the Radium MP3 codec.
Then you just have to save, you'll get a huge file but synonymous very well be a source of Youtube.
Antwort von maozetung:
SUPER tommy!
I try it out.
These Instructions are many thank you!
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
With your workflow, you're certainly not as bad this time, but I would recommend you not to take h264 and AAC is not synonymous, but the good old VirtualDub.
Let me not angry, but you do not know what you're doing because you throw codec and container thrown down and write next synonymous nor what Radium MP3 instead of AAC. Sorry, but your post is technically completely wrong. Please do not take personally.
H.264 is currently the most efficient MPEG4, officially adopted as the standard of MPEG, XVid is a freeware which Derviat and the counterpart to DivX. MP3 is outdated, AAC achieved at a higher compression the better values. And AVI is a container format, not a codec.
With H.264 and AAC, you can do with only 20 MB per minute, a comparatively good quality at 720x400 Web. XVid/MP3 can not keep up rudimentary, is not synonymous with higher rates.
Anamorphic encoding (eg, 720x576 in 16:9) are for Web incidentally not at all suitable, because they only need to be equalized again and the bitter errors.
If the thread author problem, a good picture to achieve - despite H.264 at the size of me and said rate - then the problem lies elsewhere. But when he writes that it is super high quality, I understand the problem quite frankly is not. But YouTube is responsible and it is unlikely to influence.
SUPER tommy!
I try it out.
These Instructions are many thank you! Poste doch lieber mal den link or send it to me sometimes as PN ... Or is this not? The Instructions of tommyb is a waste of time, synonymous sure if he meant just nice.
Antwort von maozetung:
:-)
whose video I cut and handle, synonymous wants a good "normal version" and as well as a good "high quality".
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
've Seen the clip.
Something is not true because, in the staircase I HQ Resolutionsehe education. Erklär times but the signal path, which was then rotated, so cut, how / how changed?
Antwort von maozetung:
cut and berbeitet in Premiere Pro CS3 Project:
Under Export + Film, I have a Microsoft AVI (here with Matrox codec) created, and 720x576 in 16:9 widescreen, 1,45 Ratio What evt output ---- a problem, as VLC them as 4:3 shows ---- and in a progressive, 25 frames.
The Project files (avi), I have previously made 1080i 60 in PAL transcodiert.
The synonymous mpg and AVI's I have Sorenson H.246 and 640x360 trankodiert and then uploaded in Youtube ....
I have tried synonymous, the Project directly into H.246 in Media Encoder and output in the Youtube upload ....
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
cut and berbeitet in Premiere Pro CS3 Project:
Under Export + Film, I have a Microsoft AVI (here with Matrox codec) created, and 720x576 in 16:9 widescreen, 1,45 Ratio What evt output ---- a problem, as VLC them as 4:3 shows ---- and in a progressive, 25 frames.
The Project files (avi), I have previously made 1080i 60 in PAL transcodiert.
The synonymous mpg and AVI's I have Sorenson H.246 and 640x360 trankodiert and then uploaded in Youtube ....
I have tried synonymous, the Project directly into H.246 in Media Encoder and output in the Youtube upload .... Ok, I can see where the wind blows ... with what Cam was rotated, and why in 60i?
Antwort von tommyb:
Hey, why recommend you do not like him because a program such as MeGUI? There, he can x264 (FREE) and AAC (Nero) s.besten equal access and the whole in a MP4 container muxen including the right AR.
Let's see if he will make clear (without a whole day to invest).
Eh you so insignificant and not technically proven expresses how these things here:
The Instructions of tommyb is a waste of time. I would prefer to be quiet.
More than just his video in the highest possible quality is the thread creator does not want to upload and when it is actually poor quality after the upload, then
1) the encoder will probably build Mist
2) the decoder of YouTube with the highly efficient h264 will not clear (probably synonymous a little s.Encoder)
Dr. So, why should he not take a codec that YouTube surely knows, because he has long existed and not only be interpreted correctly (Profiles@h.264)? Or, you know the YouTube Unwandlungsprozess so accurately? XviD is definitely very compatible, if it is.
Ultimately, you can he can still so many clips to your rüberschicken technically competent opinion, s.Ende he is synonymous only "so-wise than as before."
Good day!
@ maozetung
If your video after export good looks (I think you write it so), then please consider yourself s.meine instructions.
It can s.den limit the maximum data rate at YouTube, if it still looks bad.
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
@ tommyb
Take professional criticism personally, please.
The problem here is much next in front, and I just try to find out where exactly to him then to say what he can change.
The material was to the point where there is a H.264 should be already damaged. And if you try such a sloping material next to compress, so then again what draus YouTube compressed, simply does not potentiate the error itself, and that is happening here.
Antwort von maozetung:
I have a SonyHDR and it is from the USA.
The clips in Premiere 1080 60i are created with both PAL and replaced or have been referenced, Matrox export in 1080i HD and 25 frames in the timeline adjusted.
Relatively quickly, I could the project in HD and convert the native material spend. But that is a resource issue, since I about 20 Timelines have set about each other, synchronously to the music to cut ....
So I have a PAL project I created and the files referenced, so to speak ...
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
I have a SonyHDR and it is from the USA.
The clips in Premiere 1080 60i are created with both PAL and replaced or have been referenced, Matrox export in 1080i HD and 25 frames in the timeline adjusted.
Relatively quickly, I could the project in HD and convert the native material spend. But that is a resource issue, since I about 20 Timelines have set about each other, synchronously to the music to cut ....
So I have a PAL project I created and the files referenced, so to speak ... The dog is in the standard conversion buried, so the conversion of 60i after PAL before editing. What did you change? There are transformers that cost nothing, and those with whom you can afford a house. This suggests that standard is no small Convert.
If I give you a Council must then
1. resychronisiere the timeline / sequence with the original data in 60i, the Halbbildfolge correctly (please on an external monitor tube necessarily consider that flickers nix!), of course, the timeline to HDV 1080/60i and cut your movie with the 1:1 original settings done . Make sure that the clips are not the half zusammenkopiert, so long as the picture is not in the size or speed is changed.
2. Then you exportierst the movie from the timeline s.is, so HDV in 1080/60i, so still 1:1
3. The complete piece of film you load into After Effects Pack an adaptive deinterlace filter and drüber exportierst as it once after PAL AVI with 720x576 as Uncompressed 8-bit or HuffYUV, with audio (48 kHz). This is your master for everything (DVD, broadcast band, etc.)
4. From the master then you create the AVI with H.264 (2000-3000 kbit / s) and AAC (96kHz) in the size 720x405, which is now your YouTube Master.
With settings in After Effects you need to play around a bit to change the standard to be optimized. Eighth simply that there are no prongs and the movements are unnecessary, just try a few settings from. It is never perfect, but certainly a lot better than what you now have.
Antwort von maozetung:
Super Marc!
Thank you.
How can I richige Halbbildfolge, for example, detect change in speed? The output tube does so only in special, when the Project in Premiere a PAL Project is.
Gether so: gradually each frame sequence check whether this liquid to the other follows ...
My only question to understand: in Premiere, there is the function in the timeline (CS3 and CS4, right mouse button, fields), the fields can be joined together, which makes the adaptive deinterlace filter else? Where is it?
Matrox advertises so with the function that is relatively easy of HDV (eg 1080) and PAL or back in / on the timeline can adapt. My problem is my rather 60i?
Could the problem lie synonymous s.Matrox codec?
Nevertheless, I am confident the problem has become, I knew already that the quality problem s.der standard conversion could lie.
Antwort von tommyb:
4. From the master then you create the AVI with H.264 (2000-3000 kbit / s) and AAC (96kHz) in the size 720x405, which is now your YouTube Master. 1. If resolution 720x400 (mod16)
2. What should the cheese with 96kHz?
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
4. From the master then you create the AVI with H.264 (2000-3000 kbit / s) and AAC (96kHz) in the size 720x405, which is now your YouTube Master.
1. If resolution 720x400 (mod16)
2. What should the cheese with 96kHz? 1. 720 / 1.77777 are 405, not 400 (16:9)
2. I mean of course 96 kBit, sorry:) ...
MB
Antwort von tommyb:
1. And there is still no mod16
http://encodingwissen.de/spezial/mod-regeln.html
Antwort von happythewicked:
hi I have another problem with youtube and the qualities of:
I have a video that I uploaded with h.264, 1280x720, deinterlaced and about 5000 kbit / s rausgerechnet did, and it only runs on high resolution ...
ordinary resolution if I want to watch: this video is no longer available. this is because since I've uploaded it.
it may be that this does not youtube can count down to normal widergabegrösse?
have you seen such experiences synonymous done?
and anyway: somehow I'm not entirely satisfied with the high resolution that I had somehow expected more than that .. how could it get worse the picture? I see again and again sauscharfe clips
zb:
how to make the so razor sharp?
Antwort von Axel:
... and anyway: somehow I'm not entirely satisfied with the high resolution that I had somehow expected more than that .. how could it get worse the picture? The background, I can not explain to you, but I recognize the phenomenon: pixel blocks in blur, motion blur and dark places.
Quotes from an old thread (although it went to higher data rates, but the principle remains the same):
For me (Final Cut Pro with Compressor or Quicktime Export Preset with "H.264 for HD-DVD") provide for the different disorders. There are actually pixel blocks (particularly on large dark areas), which is build and then disappear.
For an answer, what's wrong and how to prevent it could ever thank you. Pixel blocks always indicate a procedure to abort. The bandwidth may be too little or too little time. The reason for this can be images, the encoder in the "stress", that is motion blur + is problematic.
Give a look to the sample slightly "Noise" on it (Grain) (That would be sharp) and look, whether it is gone. You have right, incidentally, that the clip is a lot of blurring and movement.
However, only really dark parts affected.
I hope I have you with the correct Grain: The HDV - video will be with, probably very subtle, Grain newly rendered, and then exported? Yes, that was understood ... versuch the times, you make it easier to estimate the motion and the Encodierprozess is not aborted.
The bodies with the dark, it is clear ... Reasons I do not, because then everyone again "impractical" calls. I have a 20 seconds excerpt of much blur (macro), movement (chopping onions) and dark spots contained so treated, as you've described it, and, Wow! An equal, almost somewhat calmer than in the Picture Original HDV, at 10 Mbit. Must still experimenting with how far the Grain, I can go down, because if you look closely, he is synonymous after the conversion, a bit like Gain Noise. Once again, thank you.
Antwort von happythewicked:
hey thanks. The times I have to try out ... thanks.
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
1. And there is still no mod16
http://encodingwissen.de/spezial/mod-regeln.html That is no law, but a workaround for some encoders. An ordinary encoder knows well to help, I think. But the thread author might like to try out, if he finds a difference, if it 400 instead of 405 lines. I like to learn.
MB
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
Super Marc!
Thank you.
How can I richige Halbbildfolge, for example, detect change in speed? The output tube does so only in special, when the Project in Premiere a PAL Project is.
Gether so: gradually each frame sequence check whether this liquid to the other follows ...
Strictly on a HD tube. But it is synonymous, if you ever nachschlägst, which is standard in 60i and what we must adjust in Premiere. I guess times upper / odd field first.
My only question to understand: in Premiere, there is the function in the timeline (CS3 and CS4, right mouse button, fields), the fields can be joined together, which makes the adaptive deinterlace filter else? Where is it? Does Premiere vermutlicht not, but in After Effects, then at least as a plugin of any third party. Adaptive Deinterlace is limited in its effect on the image content and provides significantly better results, while simple half ineinanderkopiert and simply join a correspondingly blurred picture produced, whose vertical Resolutionum 50% worse than the original.
Matrox advertises so with the function that is relatively easy of HDV (eg 1080) and PAL or back in / on the timeline can adapt. My problem is my rather 60i? No idea what makes Matrox, but Matrox is not necessarily in the professional league, of, therefore I'm skeptical. Your problem is with the standard Sicherhiet conversion of 60i.
Could the problem lie synonymous s.Matrox codec? As I said, I do not want Matrox verteufeln, but for example, of HDV 60i according to Matrox DV 50i, which is as large in coming out.
I hope I could help you.
Antwort von tommyb:
An ordinary encoder knows well to help, I think. Indeed ... na if you say, all the others say its probably misguided sheep.
I mean ... when you here the whole time of
H.264 in spite of my size and said rate talking about why you recommend the thread author then a given bitrate? Even if he uses in 2pass VBR, why?
When it comes to
Web outstanding quality at 720x400 , why do you think the thread author is not "Hey, but instead use the default bitrate prefer a quality value." This verbrät the encoder as much bit rate for scenes or for the entire video as it sees necessary.
In addition, I recommend a quantizer value in XviD (yes, this outdated freeware derivative of h264 - is clear). If you have a Q1 Xvid video with h264 compares (synonymous for quality and coded quantizer) is a barely noticed a difference, except the larger file. That is outdated with the XviD video codec coded terribly compatible with every system.
But why I tell it at all, but my words are certainly only
pure waste of time, synonymous sure if he meant just nice. Just as the words of others in this forum. A high!
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
(...)
talking about why you recommend the thread author then a given bitrate? Even if he uses in 2pass VBR, why?
When it comes to
Web outstanding quality at 720x400
, why do you think the thread author is not "Hey, but instead use the default bitrate prefer a quality value." This verbrät the encoder as much bit rate for scenes or for the entire video as it sees necessary.
If you know what you're doing, you can make it so, or not? A quality value is a flaccid affair, a numerical value for the Compression is a matter of experience.
Somehow I understand your problem but not. The problem is where else but, reg dich doch mal ab. Do you teach something, or you can have everything? Maybe you thought calmed a little, that I have for some years independently trained media designer. I know not all synonymous, but a few things but now.
MB
Antwort von maozetung:
Hello again,
now I have not placed next.
The standard conversion is bypassed in Premiere, as I only with native 1080i handle:
Even more directly, because of Premiere at 29.97 frames in H.264 transcoding, since I get no good results in Youtube.
The HD output 1440x1080 Premiere always wants to produce a 4:3, why .... is 16:9? Could that be the error?
It seems better to go when I premiere of Quicktime to 720p output (dann16: 9!) And it later with Quicktime H264 to resize to 640, but there are fuzzy images on Youtube.
and now?
Antwort von pailes:
In addition, I recommend a quantizer value in XviD (yes, this outdated freeware derivative of h264 - is clear). Only the way, Xvid, H.264 is not a derivative but a MPEG-4-variant. MPEG-4 and H.264 are
not synonymous to understand.
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
Hello again,
now I have not placed next.
The standard conversion is bypassed in Premiere, as I only with native 1080i handle:
Even more directly, because of Premiere at 29.97 frames in H.264 transcoding, since I get no good results in Youtube.
Where are the half way now? With what settings you walk directly from Premiere H.264?
The HD output 1440x1080 Premiere always wants to produce a 4:3, why .... is 16:9? Could that be the error? Is not synonymous HD, but HDV. HD is 1280x720 or 1920x1080
It seems better to go when I premiere of Quicktime to 720p output (dann16: 9!) And it later with Quicktime H264 to resize to 640, but there are fuzzy images on Youtube.
and now? What do you want suddenly with 640? Also, you write with no word on what codecs using the meantime, no word about data, how should I help you there? Quicktime is not a codec.
MB
Antwort von maozetung:
Ok,
Quicktime with Quicktime Pro, I thought, where I mp4 with H.264 and synonymous "MPEG Streamclip" in 2Mit transkordiert have. Previously, I have HD 720p, H.264, progressive, join, Qudratische Pixel> Premiere output.
My Settings in Premiere of 1440x1080 directly to H.264 are progressive, 29.97 frames, 640x360 (720x400, I tried synonymous), 2 Mbps (synonymous probiert others), audio AAC 56kHz .... bad quality in a normal version in Youtube
When the output 1440x1080 with H.264 with the same ratio as Project and progressive, and approximately 29.97 frames 7MBit (too low?), I get 4:3? ....
If I were in the Mp4 vimeo.com uploading, there are no problems, but did not synonymous "Quailtät normal" view.
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
Ok,
Quicktime with Quicktime Pro, I thought, where I mp4 with H.264 and synonymous "MPEG Streamclip" in 2Mit transkordiert have. Previously, I have HD 720p, H.264, progressive, join, Qudratische Pixel> Premiere output. Mach times with 3000, Motion Detection, etc. everything to "highest" and "optimal". What I still do not understand, what you drift with the fields? Where and when will those of i after p deinterlaced?
My Settings in Premiere of 1440x1080 directly to H.264 are progressive, 29.97 frames, 640x360 (720x400, I tried synonymous), 2 Mbps (synonymous probiert others), audio AAC 56kHz .... bad quality in a normal version in Youtube Sure, because not only the first half matscht but synonymous with standard conversion performed. I have already written above that this does not work.
When the output 1440x1080 with H.264 with the same ratio as Project and progressive, and approximately 29.97 frames 7MBit (too low?), I get 4:3? ....
If I were in the Mp4 vimeo.com uploading, there are no problems, but did not synonymous "Quailtät normal" view. Yes, because 4:3 is synonymous yes I've already written. I would be very welcome stop if you just exactly the end times would have made that I had posted to you. So we turn to the trouble spots in a circle.
MB
Antwort von maozetung:
Merging of fields: deinterlance! Premiere in the preview image, otherwise there would be still in the timeline, the possibility of the fields.
I have the operation after Effetcs by the lack of adaptive deinterlacer can not do, but agrees that:
I was a 1440x1080 (4:3) as an avi (which codec here?) in Premiere of After Effects into a Koposition to be a 720x567 uncompressed to get? There are no losses to 16:9, if I am to 720x405 with the user?
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
Merging of fields: deinterlance! Premiere in the preview image, otherwise there would be still in the timeline, the possibility of the fields.
I have the operation after Effetcs by the lack of adaptive deinterlacer can not do, but agrees that:
I was a 1440x1080 (4:3) as an avi (which codec here?) in Premiere of After Effects into a Koposition to be a 720x567 uncompressed to get? There are no losses to 16:9, if I am to 720x405 with the user? It is above everything, not AVI s.Anfang, but "s.is", ie HDV! Please read again by:
1. resychronisiere the timeline / sequence with the original data in 60i, the Halbbildfolge correctly (please on an external monitor tube necessarily consider that flickers nix!), of course, the timeline to HDV 1080/60i and cut your movie with the 1:1 original settings done . Make sure that the clips are not the half zusammenkopiert, so long as the picture is not in the size or speed is changed.
2. Then you exportierst the movie from the timeline s.is, so HDV in 1080/60i, so still 1:1
3. The complete piece of film you load into After Effects Pack an adaptive deinterlace filter and drüber exportierst as it once after PAL AVI with 720x576 as Uncompressed 8-bit or HuffYUV, with audio (48 kHz). This is your master for everything (DVD, broadcast band, etc.)
4. From the master then you create the AVI with H.264 (2000-3000 kbit / s) and AAC (96kBit) in the size 720x405, which is now your YouTube Master.
Supplement: If you just stay on the web so there is no reason to change according to PAL standard to enforce. That is, the rate you can always leave at 30fps.
MB
Antwort von maozetung:
but I can not "s.is" so to enter, I must choose. There are many possibilities.
The origin is simply a avi of Matrox, but this is not After Effects. I will then probably take a Microsoft AVI with 1440x1080, 29.97 Frame Progressive ...
Supplement: If you just stay on the web so there is no reason to change according to PAL standard to enforce. That is, the rate you can always leave at 30fps. Moment, but now I need no standard conversion?
Antwort von maozetung:
I have a third party for adapt. Deinterlancing found: Boris Continuum. Is this good?
Antwort von MarcBallhaus:
but I can not "s.is" so to enter, I must choose. There are many possibilities.
The origin is simply a avi of Matrox, but this is not After Effects. I will then probably take a Microsoft AVI with 1440x1080, 29.97 Frame Progressive ...
Supplement: If you just stay on the web so there is no reason to change according to PAL standard to enforce. That is, the rate you can always leave at 30fps.
Moment, but now I need no standard conversion? You make me ready:)
1. There is no plausible reason why After Effects is not the Matrox codec should know. If the codec is installed, it is installed.
2. What the hell is the codec ??????? AVI 1440x1080 is not a codec, but tells me only that you have a AVI container take, is a film with the size 1440x1080 throw, but not what you komprimierst him!
3. Standard conversion, you must not do if you stay on the Web, is nonsensical.
4. Adaptive deinterlacer ... one can not simply at AE in options what to do if no fields are rendered? There are thousands of tools in any case, here I do not know, but it is not.
MB
Antwort von maozetung:
Thank you for your great help and support.
Just to complement ... I'm not a bloody Beginners, Vollprofi but not synonymous, the 20 years since nothing else makes as video technology ...
As I said the attendance figures of this theatrical look, the theme is not simply a circular and question my colleagues who do not synonymous Beginners, show the apparently all a "false" Workflow perform when it comes to good output quality.
In addition, a YouTube-quality probably get very tedious, because I praise Vimeo.
At least I would not think that the De-Interlancen premiere of problems may be.
Fortunately, there is Slashcam!
