1 person found this helpful
1st question is do you have a red line over your video when you first put it on the timeline?
If you do have a red line, before doing anything to the video, your project settings do not match your video
>Full HD camera
Not much information for someone to try and help
Read Bill Hunt on a file type as WRAPPER http://forums.adobe.com/thread/440037
What is a CODEC... a Primer http://forums.adobe.com/thread/546811
What CODEC is INSIDE that file? http://forums.adobe.com/thread/440037
Report back with the codec details of your file, use the programs below... a screen shot works well to SHOW people what you are doing
For Mac http://mediainfo.massanti.com/
>don't want to lose the HD quality but I also can't have a 4.5gig file either
It really sounds like you are trying to pour 10 pounds of flour in a 5 pound container... can't be done
To reach a 2gig limit, something has to go away... either time or quality
Okay thank you I believe I have what you are searching for and I will fill in as much as possible I had no idea there was that much information in a video clip!
For the 1st question, I cannot see any lines over the video when I first place it on the timeline. It appears as normal. No red, green, or anything:
>Full HD Camera - The Samsung Q10 Switchgrip films in 1920x1080/60i or HD 1280x720/60p The card slot is SDHC/SD The actual file I am referring to was recorded in 1920x1080 and it looks as if the properties read 59fps 60i
The printscreened codec information you requested is below, although I hope it will enlarge well enough to be seen:
As for the last part, I'm 100% okay with sacrificing quality, but of course I would still like to render a relatively clear video (or as close to HD video as possible) that is 2gig or less. Quite frankly I'd just be happy to render anything that doesn't have the lagging horizontal bars. I must definitely be rendering in the wrong setting since the unedited (raw) video plays perfectly in all of my media players.
1 person found this helpful
Install the latest version of the QuickTime player (64-bit version). PRE relies on this a lot and I think it may help resolve your problem..
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children
When uploading to youtube, do you see a presets dropdown (in the Share->Online->Youtube screen)? That will show you a 1920x1080 preset. Select that and see if the uploaded video has the desired properties.
HD on Youtube? Youre kidding! Thier idea of HD is a pale resemblance of it.
Have you tried some 720p footage with the appropriate project preset to see if this has the same effect?
Do you see these "bars" only on moving objects?
Does the final replayed movie from Youtube still have the bars or only when you preview it in PE9?
Uncompressed 720p should be considerably smaller than 1920i and possibly better on Youtube than 1920i that has been compressed to the same size.
It will be converted by Youtube to FLV and mangled anyway as well and they mangle p better than i.
Per your request, I have been following along. Actually, prior to the request, I have been reading this thread.
I think that Neale, and others, are on the right track, and have not thought of anything else, that I could add.
Thank you all,
(Neale) I updated Quicktime for 64 bit processors and this doesn’t seem to solve the rendering issue.
(VDOSurfer )– Youtube only has a single upload button, they do recommend project settings and they provide a list of settings to use to help with upload quality. Their recommended settings are as follows:
No Edit Lists (or you may lose AV sync)
Video Codec: H.264
Progressive scan (no interlacing)
2 consecutive B frames
Closed GOP. GOP of half the frame rate.
Variable bitrate. No bitrate limit required, though we offer recommended bit rates below for reference
Color Space: 4.2.0
Frame rates should match the source material Content at 1080i 60, should be deinterlaced, going from 60 interlaced fields per second to 30 progressive frames per second before uploading.
YouTube uses 16:9 aspect ratio players. If you are uploading a non-16:9 file, it will be processed and displayed correctly as well, with pillar boxes or letter boxes provided by the player. If you want to fit the player perfectly, encode at these resolutions: 1080p: 1920x1080]
(Ted) At the very start of this I originally rendered in .WMV (personally I prefer this format) with the highest settings I could access in APE9. I then moved on to attempt to reduce the bitrate to see if that would help somehow. The rendered .wmv video (along 4 other test renders in different formats) were uploaded to Youtube and I started with the lowest available playback preset on each, switching all the way to the highest available preset and all had lag time or bars, be it sawtooth, or blurred horizontal bars. This was after allowing Youtube to fully process the video. The horizontal bars are definitley more apparent when sharp/rapid movements are made. I have also watched the video on the iPad and a second PC and these bars are visible on all. I have several codec players and plugins on the laptop I'm using to run the AEP9 program on, and I have 212 Gig free on my PC with an additional 160 gig portable boost, so I have decent processing speeds. Strangely enough, the editing preview window in AEP9 shows a very clear picture and playback while I edit the file - which is great! It's when I render that the problems begin.
I have explored rendering in several formats, I've pretty well walked down the list of all of the options available (less PAL) I've even tried H.264 project settings, and I’ve also let the program select project settings based on the clip and rendering the finished product to .m2v – I say .M2v because so far this has been the only setting that keeps the video quality intact but it unlinks the video and audio once rendered and creates two separate files - even with the multiplex option selected. The only other semi decent output was .wmv, the sound and picture matched perfectly but had slow horizontal lines with rapid motion. I’ve rendered 1080x720 as general practice to .wmv files with no problems in the past. It is only now, that I have upgraded to a full HD camera that captures videos in 1920x1080/60i (59fps) that I am having so many problems finding a good setting to render in that doesn’t create some sort of playback glitch.
I guess I will keep playing with these settings. I almost wonder if there is a way to render to .mp4 at this point… I’m not even sure what will work anymore, or if an upgrade to a higher version of Adobe Premiere is in order (9 is what I have now). At this point I’d hate to have to downgrade – whether it be reducing the camera's recording size, or even reducing the raw file size to 1080x720, that would sort of defeat the entire purpose of upgrading to a better camera. Even if all of this wasn’t to create a 13 minute Youtube video, I would still like to know I can render SOMETHING at some point for whatever reason. Upgrading to a Full HD Camera with APE9 seems to be tough for this program to render, either that or I am just really dumb and missing something obvious (which is ENTIRELY POSSIBLE). lol!
Alright all, thank you so much for your suggestions. I really do appreciate your time. I will keep trying!
1 person found this helpful
Youtube upload can happen from within Premiere Elements 9. You do not NEED to save a file and then upload it externally. Place the contents in the timeline and then go to Share->Online->youtube. There is a dropdown called "presets" in this screen. Try the options there and then let us know if that works.
What are your machine specs? You mentioned 212G of HDD space available; and we know nothing else. High-definition video editing requires a more powerful PC.
VDO Surfer, Hi! Yes I went back in and did see the Youtube upload option in Adobe so I rendered by uploading directly to Youtube with the dropdown setting [High Definition for Youtube 1920x1080] - the video still had extensive motion blur. That part is probably a great deal Youtube’s Issue, Ted’s comment makes sense after I researched a bit more, apparently there is a big debate about what Youtube considers ‘high def’. Anyhow once I uploaded to Youtube directly, the video playback options within youtube allowed me to playback up to 1920, 1920 was a nightmare with sawtooth jagged edges during motion; 1080 was sharp as a tack, the audio synched perfectly BUT horizonatal motion blur occurred every few seconds - you could actually see visible bars in the picture this time. The only option with less motion issues or bars was 780p, unfortunately the only reason it looked better was because the entire video suddenly had a bad case of Gaussian Blur. Should I go back and try to render in 1080 since that was the closest I've gotten so far, maybe playing with the interlacing process? I believe I saw that option somewhere in there. I also read another thread that mentioned bars can often be someone seeing the interlacing process, something about progressive… GAH I don’t know. It’s all looking alike now. Bars and blur. I haven't been able to render this edited video (thus far) to any format that keeps the raw settings somewhat intact, let alone render it in a way that is YT friendly. I think down grading to 1440 or even 1080 may be the only option I have.
The PC I have is the Toshiba Satellite Specs are as follows: Dual Core AMD Turion™ II Dual-Core Mobile M520 2.30 GHz 4GB ram 64 Bit operating system with a 160 gig (portable hard drive boost). That’s really all I know about the internal workings of the computer itself. Of that, I have the aforementioned space free (212 gig + 160 gig boost).
I’ll definitely keep trying, Thanks again
As I said, dont try to feed YouTube intelaced stuff.
HD Interlacing is for Blue Ray and ordinary TV sets and TV transmission
HD Progressive is for computers and hi end TV sets because it requires the higher bandwith that they can cope with.
Youtube is almost always seen only on computers so they expect progressive.
I have never seen an interlaced FLV that didn't have some problem with movement.
If your original video is shot in interlace then convert it to progressive (if you can) and see it that plays OK in WIndows Media Player first without bars.Then upload it.
There is also something about "which field first" setting but I cant remember what it was!
Some computer video cards (particuarly slow laptops) can shop this interlace bar stuff on 1920HD anyway on AVI.
What you are seeing on the PE preview is reduced resolution about one fifth of the pixels of the final product because that leaves more processing power for showing the thumbnails and timeline moving. It appears just as sharp because only because it is one fifth the size!
If you have "Gaussian blur" it is probablty because you are trying to badly reduce original HD to a lower pixels when you should have shot the original footage progressive and in the lower resolution in the first place.
Ironically original footage on a cheap 780p camera can look better on Youtube than an expensive 1900x1080i one