Skip navigation

Premiere Elements

painter6565 Calculating status...

Currently Being Moderated

YouTube jumpiness

Jan 28, 2012 8:13 AM

I'm having a problem with videos that look fine on my computer but look "jumpy" on YouTube.

I took the video clips with a FlipCam UltraHD camera, brought them into Premiere Elements 9 and edited them, then "shared" it as a WMV file for computer playback. The video looks great on my computer, but when uploaded to YouTube it looks jumpy.

I've tried a lot of combinations of presets and export settings, also tried saving as AVI and MPG and Flash Video for YouTube, but the end result seems to always be that the video looks fine on my computer but jumpy when uploaded to YouTube.

What the heck is going on? Here's what the YouTube videos look like:

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

1451 Views 18 Replies Latest reply: nealeh, Jan 31, 2012 1:12 AM

Replies

Currently Being Moderated

1. Bill Hunt,

Jan 28, 2012 8:21 AM in reply to painter6565

Report

Welcome to the forum.

Unfortunately, YouTube will re-Encode your video, after it has been uploaded. The specs. of the Encode will likely change about every quarter, as they try for smaller files.

As a test, Export/Share your Project to H.264, which should result in an MP4 file, and upload and test that file on YouTube.

Good luck, and please report back,

Hunt

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

2. painter6565,

Jan 28, 2012 9:57 AM in reply to Bill Hunt

Report

Thanks Bill. I exported to H264 1440 x 1080i 30 (let me know if that's not the correct H264 setting--there are three other options). This resulted in an .m2t file about four times as big as my other test files (400-plus mb). I'm uploading it to YouTube as a test, but it will take a while, obviously (I'm on satellite internet and it's about the speed of DSL). Not sure why it didn't create an .mp4 file.

I'm not sure if it makes a difference, but the raw clips from my Flip are mp4. The "properties" show a frame speed of 60 fps. However, when importing into Premier Elements 9 under the Flip settings, there is no option for 60 fps, only 30 fps. Would that make any difference? I've tried manually adjusting both import and export settings to 60 frames per second, but again, the resulting video plays fine on my computer but plays jumpy on YouTube.

I know somebody else who is using the same camera and software (I think it's Premiere 9, though it could be 10 if that makes a difference), and she exports the videos as Quicktime files and uploads them, and they seem to play much better on YouTube. Any chance this would help? I don't have Quicktime on my PC but could get it if that's the only solution.

John

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

3. Steve Grisetti,

Jan 28, 2012 2:07 PM in reply to painter6565

Report

What you first started your Premiere Elements project, did you select the project settings for Flip video?

Selecting the right project settings is essential to getting a good output. If they're not right, no output settings are going to work particularly well.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

4. painter6565,

Jan 28, 2012 3:35 PM in reply to Steve Grisetti

Report

Yes, I did select the project settings for Flip video. I've tried many different settings since, but originally I was using the Flip video settings. As I said, the raw clips are shown as being 60 fps, whereas there is no project preset for 60 fps, only 30 fps. So that could be an issue.

Nonetheless, the output videos play great on my computer, it's only when uploaded to YouTube that they get jumpy.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

5. painter6565,

Jan 28, 2012 3:40 PM in reply to Bill Hunt

Report

Bill, I did as you suggested (see my note above about the m2t file). The uploaded video is still jumpy.

This is crazy. I get no jumpiness when using the Flip camera (crappy) software. That software is just too limited for my current video project, unfortunately. That's why I bought Premiere Elements. But something is not working right. The frustrating thing is that the raw clips look absolutely fantastic when played in Windows Media Player on my computer. And the output Premiere videos look good too--no jumpiness. It's only when uploaded to YouTube that they get jumpy.

Could it possibly have anything to do with the upload speed or my internet service?

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

6. Bill Hunt,

Jan 28, 2012 3:54 PM in reply to painter6565

Report

Regarding the 60 FPS, I wonder if the Flip is actually shooting at 60 Frames per Second, or the more likely, 60 Fields per Second, which is actually 30 Frames per Second. Some camera mfgrs. play a bit fast and loose with some of their terms.

Maybe another Flip user can address that specifically, especially if they have been getting good YouTube results.

Think that the Arizona Diamondbacks gave my wife a Flip HD camera, but am not sure that it has ever been out of the box. If I can track that down, I will give it a test, to see how the footage behaves. Gotta' be around here somewhere.

Good luck,

Hunt

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

7. painter6565,

Jan 28, 2012 4:05 PM in reply to Bill Hunt

Report

Thanks Bill. It did occur to me that they meant fields per second rather than frames per second, but when you right click the raw clips and go to "properties," it plainly says "60 frames per second." Not saying it's necessarily right, but that's what it says in the properties box (in the "details" tab).

Thanks for tracking down that Flip if you can. I have the Ultra HD. However, there are a couple different Ultra HD models shown in the AE 9 presets (30 and 29.97), and I'm not sure which I have or how to find out. Doesn't say in the Flip manual.

Anyway, I'm going to try importing with the Flip settings and exporting as Quicktime (after I download it). That seems to have worked for other people I know.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

8. Bill Hunt,

Jan 28, 2012 4:43 PM in reply to painter6565

Report

Out of curiosity, download and install the great, free utility, MediaInfo. run one of your files through that, and tell us what it says about the file. BTW - MediaInfo and G-Spot are two very similar utilities, that anyone editing video, should not be without.

Good luck,

Hunt

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

9. Steve Grisetti,

Jan 29, 2012 6:21 AM in reply to painter6565

Report

You're making this way too complicated, John.

All you've got to do is:
a) start a project using the Flip video project settings that match your camcorder (There's one for hi-def and one for standard def video).
b) Output the file using these settings:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/623549

Then load it up to YouTube using the YouTube site's video uploader.

If you do those two things, you shouldn't have to do any other tweaks or customizing of the settings. In fact, doing so could undermine the workflow.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

10. painter6565,

Jan 29, 2012 11:29 AM in reply to Steve Grisetti

Report

Steve, I followed those instructions precisely and this is the result:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDTwc3D-pMc

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

11. Steve Grisetti,

Jan 29, 2012 2:45 PM in reply to painter6565

Report

If you're seeing what I'm seeing, that's not interlacing. That looks more liked dropped frames from a poor video capture.

Is that what you're talking about? The way the video occasionally jumps like a frame or two are missing?

If so, how did you get the video from the camcorder to your computer? Did you use Premiere Elements' Get Media tool?

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

12. painter6565,

Jan 29, 2012 4:53 PM in reply to Steve Grisetti

Report

Well, that's interesting, Steve. No, I did not use the Get Media tool to get the videos from my camcorder to my computer, I opened up the DCIM folder and dragged/copied them to my hard drive. Then, to get them into Premiere, I opened up a Premiere project and dragged them into the "Project" window. (This is how I've always copied digital pics from my camera to my computer with no discernable loss of quality, so it didn't occur to me that it was a no-no.)

Now, if you're saying that the problem is dragging them from the FlipCam onto my computer, I would respond that the raw clips look absolutely fantastic when played on my computer. So it's hard for me to fathom that any frames got "dropped" when dragging from the Flip onto my hard drive. If they did, then they'd look jumpy when played on my computer, right? They are crystal clear when played in Windows Media Player.

Now if you're saying that I might have dropped frames by dragging them from my hard drive into the Project window of a PE project, I suppose that's possible. Here is a sample where I actually used the Get Media function to bring the clip in to PE. You can tell me if you think there's a difference. (And by the way, I really do appreciate everybody's help with this! I continue to believe that since the raw clips play so clearly, there has to be a way to make them play better on YouTube.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gpC_yT9kYg

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

13. Bill Hunt,

Jan 29, 2012 6:19 PM in reply to painter6565

Report

With most flash media footage, it is very important to copy over the entire folder structure for the card, to the HDD.

Good luck,

Hunt

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

14. Steve Grisetti,

Jan 30, 2012 5:16 AM in reply to Bill Hunt

Report

I don't see one jump or tremble in your video.

On the other hand, it's rare that you see someone trying to push out such a high resolution video on the web! If you're seeing shakey playback, it could be that I'm watching it at 7 in the morning over a high-speed connection. Watching this video on even DSL during a time of even remotely heavy traffic would certainly make it shakey. You just can't put out a video that huge over the internet!

Try creating a 640x480 or even at 1280x720, as I recommended a few posts up. Chances are it will demand much less bandwith and will play much more smoothly.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

15. Bill Hunt,

Jan 30, 2012 6:30 AM in reply to Steve Grisetti

Report

I watched it last night over DSL through a G-class wireless, and after repeated viewing, saw two tiny "glitches," that resembled a single dropped Frame, or maybe a 1-Frame pause/hang. Even when downloading the content to cache, it looked good. I could not tell if the "glitches" (two by my count) came at the same spot, as the actions are fairly repetitious, and I did not note the TimeCode. Looked good to very good, at least to my eyes.

Hunt

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

16. nealeh,

Jan 30, 2012 7:07 AM in reply to Bill Hunt

Report

To eliminate the Internet from the assessment I downloaded the .MP4 720p version and the .FLV 360 version. The MP4 version played smoothly although the image seemed soft. The statistics tab showed three video frames dropped, but I didn't notice it during replay.

There is certainly 'something' about the FLV version - hard to put into words. It's more a stutter than a jump - perhaps as Bill says a lost frame. But to me it seems constant throughout the clip as the painter is moving crossways.

Now it seems odd to me that one should look smooth and the other not if they are both derived from the same upload. Maybe, painter6565, you could post the original raw file somewhere for me to look at.

Cheers,
--
Neale
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

17. painter6565,

Jan 30, 2012 9:17 PM in reply to nealeh

Report

I'm having better luck (I think) by just "sharing" the videos directly to YouTube using the Flash settings for high definition videos (1920 x 1080). Before I was saving them as Windows media files and Quicktime files to my computer, then uploading. Part of the issue with the test video I've been showing is the obvious traversing back and forth of the subject--that's going to accentuate even small skips (which, if you really start looking closely at YouTube videos, are fairly common). The second video linked below does not have this traversing action, and as a result any dropped frames are not noticeable, if they exist.

Here is the traversing video shared directly to YouTube as a Flash video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XizTR9Cq1Gk

And here's another video without any back and forth traversing--it looks fine, I think. Shared the same way, as Flash for YouTube.

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

If anybody knows a disadvantage to sharing the videos this way, let me know. Thanks!

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

18. nealeh,

Jan 31, 2012 1:12 AM in reply to painter6565

Report

painter6565 wrote:

If anybody knows a disadvantage to sharing the videos this way, let me know. Thanks!

No disadvantages if it works for you. Stick with it and enjoy making movies !

Cheers,
--
Neale
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children

|
Mark as: