PDA

View Full Version : Tips on using SE for YouTube videos



Jim_C
12-06-2007, 08:35 PM
Been doing a bunch recently.....
This is just what works for me... YMMV

--Create a new SE project with specs
320x240
25fps
4:3
Progressive
Save it as YouTube_01 or such for easy recall.
This size/specs is what YouTube will end up creating, so start with it
to begin with.

--Right click on SpeedEDIT output window choose 'Best Fit'.
--Drag the monitor window to create a Display sized 427x320.
Project should still be 320x240.

YouTube takes the 320x240 flash clip it creates and resizes it to this
dimension for playback. You can see the actual 320x240 clip when
viewing on YouTube by clicking the little box icon below the video.

By dragging the project window this size you are simulating every
aspect of the YT experience you can. Including the block awful resize.

If you want to view the actual file, right click on the monitor and
choose 100%.

--Add your files and edit as usual. See audio notes below.

SE will resize the files to fit the project but I have found I usually
have to enlarge them a little more to fully fill the output window.
YouTube has no safe zone, it shows it all, so fill the display window
with your image fully.

If I have to mask an edge, I enlarge the file and position it enough
so it disappears off of the screen instead of actually adding a mask
or cropping an edge.
Doing this allows image all the way to the edge with no black edges.
if it is too big of a mask job, then I add a border.

YouTube tends to darken the clips, so I add a little oomph in the mid bright areas, raise the black floor a little if need be etc. I also add a little saturation.

Remember you are editing and adjusting color etc, to make that little resized monitor look good.
So your settings may be much different than adjusting for full rez jobs.

--Using Advanced Edit Properties or Control Tree Set the 'Left to Right' pan on both L&R front channels to 0 creating a mono mix.

Save this as a toolshed for later.
If you need to raise or lower L/R volume separately do it with
advanced Left or Right Volume in the advanced edit properties, not
with panning.
Both meters should bump together in mono glory however.

--After your L/R mix, raise the master volume of the clip so the
meters hit 0db and can even bump over a little.

YouTube does not seem
to have a lower ref level and loves strong clips with the meters
hitting 0.


--Set the 'Scaling Quality' to High in Edit properties for all your
clips. Helps with the resize quality

--Render the clip with these settings:
.mp4
CBR Average 1200 Kbps
Check the box that says 'Use project settings'

AAC Audio
128Kbps
48KHz 16bit Mono

Save this as YouTube render for later.

Since YouTube will take a 10min video (I have sneaked 10:43) at a max
bitrate of 100mb, the 1200Kbps setting will make a 10min video just
under 100mb.
You can go in and assign a higher bitrate for shorter clips to raise
them to the 100meg limit, but 1200 will produce a nice clip anyway.


--Upload.


YouTube now has a small application you can install for batch
uploading. It also allows clip sized 10mins or 1GIG!! in size.
I tried it but quit using it because I did not have as much control
over Clip detail information entering at time of upload, and 'YouTube
Uploader' process wanted to start a lot on it's own and live in my
start up folder.

Just stuff that works for me......... again YMMV

Jim

Mr Rid
12-06-2007, 08:59 PM
I dont use SE, but Ive wondered about the best format and scale to submit clips that pass thru whatever YouTube's auto conversion is. I tried doing as the site advises for max quality by scaling my clip down to 320x before submission, but it looked much blockier than submitting the same clip at its original 640x and letting YouTube scale it. So I would not recommend scaling things down before hand.

Jim_C
12-06-2007, 09:08 PM
Hi Mr Rid,

Thanks for the update.
Suprised with all the packages you can use and files you play with you haven't gotten SE yet. It's a nifty little thing..

In my tests with SE I did find it's scaling was superior to letting YT do it.
At least to my eyes with my footage.

In posting about 400 clips in the last couple months Ive tried about every combo of upload possible.
I've got a 100 more or so to go, Ill try a few at 640 again.

but like I said.. YMMV... :)

Jim




I dont use SE, but Ive wondered about the best format and scale to submit clips that pass thru whatever YouTube's auto conversion is. I tried doing as the site advises for max quality by scaling my clip down to 320x before submission, but it looked much blockier than submitting the same clip at its original 640x and letting YouTube scale it. So I would not recommend scaling things down before hand.

billmi
01-03-2008, 01:32 PM
Jim,

First, thanks for taking the time to write that down - it's been quite handy.

I notice you didn't mention selecting two-pass encoding. Is that due to it not making a big enough difference, or some other reason?

Jim_C
02-17-2008, 03:30 PM
I notice you didn't mention selecting two-pass encoding. Is that due to it not making a big enough difference, or some other reason?

Hey Bill,

Just saw this.
Yea.. going to 320x240 I didn't see much difference if any when I did 2 pass.
ESPECIALLY by the time YT was done with it.
Plus there was the added time of the 2 pass.

Jim

cresshead
02-19-2008, 12:50 PM
thanks...good info

for others that like me and how we struggle with ABCD for 'words'

YT= ''youtube''
YMMV= ''your mileage may vary''

billmi
02-20-2008, 10:43 AM
In the last couple of weeks, I've had to release some videos on YouTube for a client.

I've noticed markedly better results, especially on clarity of text (block artifacts not as bad) rendering to MP4 640x480, 2-pass VBR with a high of 1800 average of 1600 and low of 1400.

I don't know how recently they changed this, but YouTube now officially recomends 640x400 as the resolution of an upload.

Jim_C
02-20-2008, 02:01 PM
No No No.. You MUST do it MY way!!!!

:D Humor....


Hi Bill,

Yea, you guys are right, I've since done some at 640x480 and most of the time the scaling was better, however once I had YT add really bad aliasing lines or something when it scaled. Almost looked like bad fielding (clip was progressive), and about 4 times YT shifted the pic over to the left leaving about 1/8th of the frame black.
Odd I know. Despite those bugs(?), the scaling did look better at times.


One benefit of working with a SE project of 320x240 is the ability to enlarge the footage to completely fill the frame. What I mean is if you use a 640x480 SE project and throw a normal SD clip in it, you get a black border from the overscan I guess, and unless you enlarge the clip larger than the original, you can't get rid of it.
If you work in 320x240, SE willl shrink the footage to fit at around 50% but there will still be the border. You can then raise the size enough to fill the frame completely.

A question about your 2 pass... Did the footage look that much better out of SE at 2 pass also? Or did you not really notice it till YT was done?

I tried a couple SE renders at 2 pass and didn't think I saw that much improvement, although there was no hard edge text, and I might not have looked well enough.


It's nice to have a YT render/quality dialog going. I know YT is considered the dregs of video quality and a toy or waste of time to some but it's the real deal now with real players invlolved showing their content.

I started offering a 'YouTube Channel' included in packages for clients. For a few bucks more I will convert their commercials, industrials etc etc and create and maintain a nice YouTube channel for them. When they look at me funny and say something like "Isn't YouTube where people post silly clips or ripped off TV shows?" I just tell them "Hey.. Disney has a YouTube channel for their conent"

ted
02-20-2008, 11:30 PM
Jim, Agreed!
I used to think of it as a "fun thing", and in the beginning it was. But now, it's a great marketing tool and we've made a few bucks doing videos for YT. I don't know what the future holds for YT, but it started a trend that has changed our lives.

On the downside it's made quality less of a demand for some. I have had more than one client tell me YT quality works, so why worry about quality.

NVentive
02-03-2009, 03:03 PM
I've been playing with HD on YouTube, it is really interesting. I've discovered that kicking the 'I' frame rate up to 15 really helps. I'm still fiddling with the ideal datarate.

Seattle-HotShot
02-04-2009, 12:13 AM
I was messing around with uploading full res 720P M2T files a while ago, take a look:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOO8Agc7CQc

Once that loads, compare it to the HD version.

Shot on a HD-100 JVC camera at 720P, edited as 720P, uploaded as 720P.

The kids like it, so I'm happy :)
Oh, and there are a bunch of related clips, so look around.
Carlin

Jim_C
02-09-2009, 06:55 PM
Tips on YouTube HD, embedding et al....

http://youtubesecretweapon.com/blog/how-to-embed-high-quality-high-definition-hd-youtube-videos-into-blogs-and-websites

Rich Deustachio
02-10-2009, 10:18 AM
Tips on uploading video to you tube and several others.
http://www.videomaker.com/content/show_video.php?movieurl=/vidcast/playlist/143/1/

Corbas
02-22-2009, 10:13 AM
I've been putting all our old videos up on our YouTube channel using SE exclusively.
http://www.youtube.com/corbasvideo
Got about 180 video up. The 2 pass mp4 format works well, although I crank up the bit rate. Will try changing the "T" rate that someone mentioned.
The wierd thing is that the mp4 file SE creates will upload and play fine on YT but have no audio when put back into SE.
Wierd.
cork

ScorpioProd
02-22-2009, 05:17 PM
So what do you guys recommend for 16:9 video to YT?

I've seen it suggested to use 870X480 for 16:9. But that's actually bigger than it should be based on my calculations. Should it be a 1.21 multiplier for DV widescreen source and a 1.33 multiplier for HD on the width resolution?

Jim_C
02-22-2009, 05:28 PM
So what do you guys recommend for 16:9 video to YT?

I've seen it suggested to use 870X480 for 16:9. But that's actually bigger than it should be based on my calculations. Should it be a 1.21 multiplier for DV widescreen source and a 1.33 multiplier for HD on the width resolution?


They will now take 1280x720 clips for full screen 720p viewing.
Still 10 minute time limit but each file can now be 1 GIG(!) in size

The non-fullscreen, wide, normal playback size is 640x360.
IOW, just watching a widescreen clip on a normal Youtube page without going fullscreen, it's 640x360.

http://help.youtube.com/support/youtube/bin/answer.py?answer=132460&topic=16612&hl=en-US

Hope that helped