Thanks guys, actually I still got bad results using the flow from the Felix G article but got better results from the John Cloudman method - my workflow using the first article was as follows: Share/Personal Comp. and then the AVI preset in PRE and I selected DV standard. I took this file and put it on
Windows Movie Maker timeline but the publish option in WMM doesn't allow you to save it to your hard drive so I selected the the "Burn a DVD" quality preset and saved it to my hard drive and then uploaded it to youtube but still got bad results. BUT, I got better results from the John Cloudman advice and here's what I did - the quicktime option in PRE gives me 2 presets, 128 k dual ISDN and a LAN preset so I chose the 128; the video tab would not let me do 1280 x 720 so I did 960 x 720; also it wouldn't let me do 44 kHz for the audio so I went with 48 kHz -
Why do these movie making programs have presets for sharing on the internet that are HD preset if HD doesn't make a difference in quality on the web? Just curious cause I would like to upload some quality footage on the internet and I want it to look GOOD!!
Thanks again, Eric
The challenge is that YouTube is continually looking for new ways to compress and re-encode the videos that are posted to their site. Good for them, because it means they can show more videos with lower bandwith. But bad for us because it means that no matter how good the quality of the video we post to the site, YouTube re-encodes it to crap.
1 person found this helpful
Yes, it's a bit of a crap shoot with YouTube as they seem to re-encode differently at times. You just hope and pray your video looks half decent. hehe
I once uploaded an AVI and the video was very clear. I did the same thing next time and it didn't like my AVI. Corrupt.
In the end, I've found that MPEG 2 widescreen is the way to go. However, I think someone here mentioned that first so that is where I got the idea from.
YouTube can be a pain in the butt, I often see videos uploaded from mobile phones and the like in great quality then I go to upload my carefully produced high quality videos, even in SD and YouTube encodes them badly and it's just like... why!!??
YouTube is very actively seeking the right combo of encoding settings to accommodate the great quantity of material vs available bandwidth, and weighed against some semblance of quality. For the producer, it is a moving target, and what is in use today, might not be in use tomorrow.
Many PrPro users have settled on WMV HD for HD material, and have been pleased with the results, even after YouTube re-encodes the material. They have been less pleased with FLV, or H.264 material.
How well does YouTube work with .MP4 videos? Is that a workable format?
It's worth a try. After all, a lot of the pocket camcorders (like the Flip) produce MP4s which are designed to be loaded directly to YouTube.