Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

YouTube Video Codecs, Resolutions & Data Rates

luigivaltulini said:
Hey Jack,
we say that there is' a big difference, both in detail at the chrominance in favor of ProRes.
How were the two mb h264 vs ProRes files?
can try to do an upload of uncompressed 8-bit QuickTime in to see if it works?

thanks ;)


[FONT=arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
Click to expand...
It's Jake:-)
Unfortunately, I don't have uncompressed 8 bit version to upload. I see no reason in creating it. I don't use 8 bit material, unless it's Canon. So, there is no reason to finish in 8 bit. I save all my masters in Prores 444.
But I do have Carly in 4K:-)
 
jake blackstone said:
Yes:-)
Click to expand...

Nope. (Unless I'm missing something...)

I just extracted your video from Vimeo's servers. Resolution: 1280x544

1_jake_blackstone_vimeo.jpg


Your video on YouTube, however, is indeed 1920x810.
 
jake blackstone said:
It's Jake:-)
Unfortunately, I don't have uncompressed 8 bit version to upload. I see no reason in creating it. I don't use 8 bit material, unless it's Canon. So, there is no reason to finish in 8 bit. I save all my masters in Prores 444.[/QUOTE

Jake,Brian,
Jake I'm sorry for the name.:(
I understand you, but I'm trying to figure out how to best transcode in 4K (for YouTube) from Davinci windows, since I did not ProRes, you have an idea about this?
Click to expand...
 
luigivaltulini said:
Jake,Brian,
Jake I'm sorry for the name.:(
I understand you, but I'm trying to figure out how to best transcode in 4K (for YouTube) from Davinci windows, since I did not ProRes, you have an idea about this
Click to expand...

DNxHD doesn't yet support 4K, so that's not an option. Hmm... How about Apple Animation or H.264 with a data rate of 75 Mbps?

I'm testing Unompressed 8-bit and 10-bit right now, so I'll see how that works.
 
Can some explain to me how to upload prorez to youtube?
I always get "unsupported format" message, when I try with e.g. prorez 4444...

I would love to re-upload in prorez to get a better result from the encoders....


Thanks!
 
Brian Iannone said:
Do you mean that you think I should conduct the tests with a video file at a resolution of 2560x1400? For the 1080p test, I used a video file at 1920x1080, but I'll be doing some 4K tests today with a 4096x2304 file. I'm not completely sure what you meant in your post, but are you suggesting that I do the tests at 2.5K instead of 4K?

Just want to be sure. =)
Click to expand...
I think that has no sense uploading 4K media when the maximum viewable is 2560x1440 on the biggest monitor.
Uploading a 2560x1440 file to youtube and leve to him the encoding. In this way you have less MB to upload and it will be about 2.5 times faster.
So, a 5 minute video at 2.5K and at 50mbps will looks better then the same video at 4K and at the same bitrate.

Maybe the test should be done comparing the Master at 2560x1400 in ProRes 422HQ/4444 with H264 at various bitrate (30-50-75-100-125-150-200Mbits) and find the one that is visually the same after being converted by Youtube and is liter as possible to permit faster uploads.

You can also upload all of them and then use keepvid.com (or similar) to download the higher res video and get what is the final nitrate after being converted by Youtube.
For example, the ProRes (like 250mbps after downloaded from youtube has a bitrate of 30mbps). So probably you can't obtain nothing better from other codecs. Now you should what bitrate of the video that you upload will be encoded at the same final bitrate of 30mbps. Maybe, the 30mbps in upload could give you a 8mbps video, and every h264 that is higher then 100mbps will give you the 30mbps final video. You'll get that an H264 encoded at 100mbps is the way to have the maximum quality with the fastest upload.

Hope that I've explained what I mean better then before =)
 
Jonas Rejman said:
Can some explain to me how to upload prorez to youtube?
I always get "unsupported format" message, when I try with e.g. prorez 4444...

I would love to re-upload in prorez to get a better result from the encoders....


Thanks!
Click to expand...

The process is exactly the same as uploading an H.264 file to YouTube. So, you're getting an unsupported format error with ProRes 4444? That's odd... Can you try uploading a ProRess 422 (HQ) or ProRes 422 file?
 
luigivaltulini said:
Jake,Brian,
Jake I'm sorry for the name.:(
I understand you, but I'm trying to figure out how to best transcode in 4K (for YouTube) from Davinci windows, since I did not ProRes, you have an idea about this?
Click to expand...
Hm, that's a dilemma with Windows platform. DNXHD doesn't support 4k yet. So, if I were you, I would use Windows command line tools to create 4k Prores on Windows. I haven't personally tried it, but I understand it's quite easy and I'd been told, that there is even a GUI app for that. But if you have a Mac, just render as DPX and transcode it to prores on a Mac.
 
Brian Iannone said:
The process is exactly the same as uploading an H.264 file to YouTube. So, you're getting an unsupported format error with ProRes 4444? That's odd... Can you try uploading a ProRess 422 (HQ) or ProRes 422 file?
Click to expand...

I used Prores HQ. Didn't tried Prores 444. I see no advantages to using 444 vs HQ for Youtube.
 
Brian Iannone said:
DNxHD doesn't yet support 4K, so that's not an option. Hmm... How about Apple Animation or H.264 with a data rate of 75 Mbps?

I'm testing Unompressed 8-bit and 10-bit right now, so I'll see how that works.
Click to expand...


Brian,
in davinci the DNxHD is only 1080p.

or i use dpx, or uncompressed 8 bit is ok, or 10 bit whit gamma shift :(
 
Brian Iannone said:
Nope. (Unless I'm missing something...)

I just extracted your video from Vimeo's servers. Resolution: 1280x544

1_jake_blackstone_vimeo.jpg


Your video on YouTube, however, is indeed 1920x810.
Click to expand...

So, as I said. Vimeo image is 1920x810. See for yourself. I used VLC, so I could open video without downloading the whole 281Mb.
qwz72t
 
jake blackstone said:
Clicking on "download the file". I can do it, I own it:-)
Click to expand...

Ah okay, that's why. You're downloading the original 'master' file that Vimeo keeps. That's not the file that Vimeo shows to people in the video player. Vimeo uses that master file to encode the smaller HD and SD files that it displays to people who watch the video. The video I downloaded was the video in the player, which is the actual file that people receive when they watch the video. That one has a resolution of 1280x544.

Try going to the page one Vimeo and playing the video. If you open up your web browser asset manager, you'll see that a ~74MB file is being referenced. That's the file you need to download.

Vimeo likes to make things complicated. :-)


By the way, I'm uploading three more videos to YouTube for testing. The codecs are Apple Intermediate Codec, QuickTime Uncompressed 8-bit 4:2:2 and QuickTime Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2. I should have results in half an hour.
 
Brian Iannone said:
Ah okay, that's why. You're downloading the original 'master' file that Vimeo keeps. That's not the file that Vimeo shows to people in the video player. Vimeo uses that master file to encode the smaller HD and SD files that it displays to people who watch the video. The video I downloaded was the video in the player, which is the actual file that people receive when they watch the video. That one has a resolution of 1280x544.

Try going to the page one Vimeo and playing the video. If you open up your web browser asset manager, you'll see that a 74MB file is being referenced. That's the file you need to download.
Click to expand...
I disagree. There is absolutely no reason for vimeo to show file with different setting from the one "officially" shown. See for yourself.
yxf1ad

By your theory, Vimeo never shows 1080, only 1270 and that is simply untrue.
You need to switch from Flash to HTML5 player. That what may be confusing you.
In Flash player mode Vimeo uses 90Mb video, but you shouldn't use Flash. That is what confuses you. Use HTML5 player and everything will be just fine. You should really complain about mess, that Flash creates and not Vimeo:-)
 
jake blackstone said:
I disagree. There is absolutely no reason for vimeo to show file with different setting from the one "officially" shown. See for yourself.
yxf1ad

By your theory, Vimeo never shows 1080, only 1270 and that is simply untrue.
You need to switch from Flash to HTML5 player. That what may be confusing you.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that Vimeo never shows 1080, I'm saying that you need to tell Vimeo to show the video at 1080 or else they won't do it. :-)

How long ago did you check the box? I've noticed that sometimes it can take a few hours for Vimeo to re-encode a 1080p version from the master.
 
Brian Iannone said:
I'm not saying that Vimeo never shows 1080, I'm saying that you need to tell Vimeo to show the video at 1080 or else they won't do it. :-)

How long ago did you check the box? I've noticed that sometimes it can take a few hours for Vimeo to re-encode a 1080p version from the master.
Click to expand...

As I said, just switch to HTML5 player and everything will be just fine. With HTML5 player Vimeo uses correct file at full resolution and not the Flash abomination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top