Frage von kgerster:
I experimented a little with a suitable full-HD quality for YouTube to reach at the lowest possible file size.
1) Export as MPEG 2, so to speak as a reference. As expected, flawless. 165 MB file size but a minute. Render time: Approx: 2:50
2) Export as SonyAVC/MP4 "at a bit rate of 4000th Filesize 30MB/Minute about. Picture is very contrasting and somewhat grainy. Many artifacts. Very rough picture during fast movements. Render time: Approx: 5:50 unusable.
3) Export as WMV also at 4000th Also about 30MB/Minute. Picture ok. A little softer than the original. Hardly artifacts. Very useful Picture. But strangely opaque (which is not s.der Bitrate s.Encoder but is Sony Vegas). Render time: around 11:30
So the same with the HD-Video Converter Xilisoft of've repeatedly. Output file was the MPEG-2 file with 165 MB
1) output as MP4 (again bitrate 4000): unusable as in Sony Vegas.
2) Output as WMV: Almost the same as Sony Vegas, but better contrast (as in the original file). perfect for the purpose.
So I will in future only the video as MPEG-2 and then output in the HD-Video Converter with 5000 MBit spend as WMV. Render time together about 9 minutes. YouTube handles WMV files synonymous fairly clean (synonymous when it is re-encoded).
I noticed the improved quality of WMV files at high compression on previously. This is still a WMV that requires less computing power and often synonymous smoothly on older machines running.
Antwort von deti:
What are you doing there is total rubbish - the apparent improvement is at the expense of all image details.
Just a render into equal with the codec "SonyAVC" or "Main Concept H.264 format in 1920x1080 with 25FPS H.264 Main Profile (CABAC encoded as the SonyAVC codec) with 8-10Mbit / s and you should have a clean presentation have.
Deti
Antwort von kgerster:
To the best option was not synonymous. Then I could move like an MPEG-2 file high. I wanted to try out where the line is. And oddly enough, the lower limit for WMV and MPEG4 / AVC is apparently different.
To test this further, I have exported a small test file as a WMV AVC with 8000 and with 5000th The WMV file is a clear artifacts on less.
I would like to synonymous without detours directly from Vegas to WMV. Only see the files of Color and contrast is not the same. In order to examine the lack of details I have statues of the
original file with which the after use of the Xilisoft converter) WMV file compared AB (. Color and contrast absolutely identical. Picture impression slightly worse and definitely better than the AVC file with 8000th And the WMV file is still 37.5% less synonymous.
Antwort von deti:
Well, then you were the first to WMV or VC-1 over H.264 provides an advantage. As always synonymous - as it works for you.
Deti
Antwort von kgerster:
Just try. Is reproducible.
If I still knew the ability to influence color and contrast when exporting to WMV directly from Vegas and what it was that in this case, the picture differs Sun.
Antwort von Marco:
I've tried it and stay with AVC. I content myself with Youtube videos to please the audience but with 1280x720. Since AVC at a data rate ranges of 6-7 Mbit / s.
Marco
www.vegasvideo.de
Antwort von kgerster:
@ Marco
Tells you why the WMV export differs in Vegas so?
Antwort von deti:
@ Kgerster:
Could you ever link one of your videos on YouTube here?
Deti
Antwort von Marco:
I do not think that the WMV export differs from about contrasts, but it's probably more the decoding in other programs. Testing times in the export of Vegas over the original.
Marco
Antwort von kgerster:
I have sometimes exaggerated the matter and an export with 2000 kb / s made. Since it is abundantly clear. The difference is synonymous at 5000 kb / s to see. The have the files on an FTP loaded because the re-rendering it again on YouTube distorted. Please not the contents.
www.schollmann.de/media/ohne_titel.mp4
www.schollmann.de / media / ohne_titel.wmv
The small file size with relatively good quality is synonymous useful for delivery of files and clippings. I had a friend abroad always sent via e-mail excerpts, which he then viewed on an LCD TV. As a WMV that was fully in order. When not at MP4.
Antwort von deti:
Hm .. So the WMV sequence stops with me both as synonymous with VLC Windows Media Player for about 1 second while the MP4-13-second sequence goes through. Something is not right there.
Deti
Antwort von Marco:
I'm with the WMV file the same problems. Either the playback stops after 1 seconds s.oder the program hangs. The WMV is also not 1920x1080, but 1440x1080.
Marco
Antwort von deti:
... And frankly, we already have to choose deliberately unfavorable parameters to achieve in such a poor quality as H.264 with you.
This time the Comparison of two files I created directly by Sony Vegas Pro 9.0e:
http://131.159.15.130/v/720p-WindowsMediaVideo-V11-2Mbit.wmv
http://131.159.15.130/v/720p-MainConcept-AVC-2Mbit.mp4
Here one can clearly see that even a little bigger unusual WMV file contains less picture detail than the MP4 file.
Deti
Antwort von kgerster:
Yes, in the example, it is so. Here is the WMV synonymous not so "milky". However, I used synonymous Vegas Movie Studio 10 HD. Get with the times to test Vegas 9 Pro.
Antwort von kgerster:
Sony Vegas Pro 9e true for me identical to 10th Movie Studio And if they are always very much moved, or pans. The source material is of a XR500VE (1080i). Also in Pro 9e, the WMVs are milky.
@ Deti The quality of your export at 2Mbit I get out in any case. At 720p it is better but not very good.
As always synonymous. We do not want to continue the infinite.
