Why do some YouTube videos look & sound so much better than others?

Discussion in 'Amateur Video Production' started by Doc, Jun 3, 2007.

  1. Doc

    Doc Guest

    I've never uploaded a YouTube video, but I was under the impression
    they were severely degraded by process of conversion to the format the
    YouTube uses since they're typically fuzzy, blocky, with degraded
    sound that's often out of sync, but then you'll see some like this:




    Not too shabby - looks decent at the default size that WMP plays it,
    sound is quite good - and stays in sync. All in a video file that's
    smaller than I'm sure a 4:15 length CD track would be. So what's the
    difference between this one and the typical ones I'm used to seeing?
    Is it strictly the quality of the original video or is there more to
    it?
     
    Doc, Jun 3, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Doc

    Will Dormann Guest


    Garbage in, garbage out.

    Sure, the final format can be a limiting factor in some cases, but if
    the original video is of low quality, the output will be even worse.

    Some problems with the "original" video include:
    1) Too low resolution
    2) Too low bitrate
    3) Not deinterlaced / improperly deinterlaced
    4) Poor choice of codec
    5) Point camera at TV screen to capture video
    6) Degraded VHS/other source
    etc...
    x) All of the above

    -WD
     
    Will Dormann, Jun 3, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Doc

    Ty Ford Guest

    Well it was professionally lit for one thing. Good cameras were used...
    properly. The audio was to begin with.

    It'd be very interesting to see what the file size was. I think they allow
    100MB.

    Ken Stone's published an e-article a few months back about youtube's
    compression and how to render for it. It's still up on his site.

    I was shooting a Canon XL2 with my best attempt at good lighting to get my
    little piece.

    Regards,

    Ty Ford


    --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
    Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
    Guitar player?:
     
    Ty Ford, Jun 3, 2007
    #3
  4. Doc

    Bucky Guest

    That's not the entire story. I have found that I get pretty good
    quality videos with my Canon SD200 digital camera (640x480, 30fps non-
    interlaced, m-jpeg codec, outdoor video with plenty of lighting). It
    looks pretty sharp viewing it with WMP, but after uploading to
    youtube, it looks like crap (pretty blurry). I blame that squarely on
    the youtube transcoder.
     
    Bucky, Jun 4, 2007
    #4
  5. Doc

    Bucky Guest

    I was shooting a Canon XL2 with my best attempt at good lighting to get my
    great video and guitar playing! so what was the specs of the file that
    you uploaded? codec, resolution, fps, bitrate, etc.
     
    Bucky, Jun 4, 2007
    #5
  6. Doc

    Ty Ford Guest

    ::With embarrassment:: I'm not totally certain. It was a while back. I tried
    several different compressions
    based on a 10.6 MB I still have on my hard drive. That file is:

    FCP Compressor's Fast Cable Streaming.mov
    Apple MPEG4
    320x240, millions
    AAC Stereo 32 kHz
    29.97 fps
    293 kb/sec.

    Normal size is 410 x 240.

    When I pull that up and compare it to the YouTube version, they look pretty
    similar.

    Of course there isn't a lot of motion going on in the shot, so that helps a
    lot. If I were Pete Townsend, windmilling the guitar, I don't think the video
    would look as good. :)

    Hope this helps.

    Regards,

    Ty Ford



    --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
    Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
    Guitar player?:
     
    Ty Ford, Jun 4, 2007
    #6
  7. Doc

    Ty Ford Guest

    Update. I went back to Revver to look at my video there (videos can be
    downloaded from revver). I did and looking at the settings remember that I
    used Apple Photo jpeg compression on at least that version because I had read
    somewhere that someone had tried it and got good results. It's about 2 MB
    larger than the 10 MB file I sent up to YouTube.

    Try that.

    Regards,

    Ty Ford


    --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
    Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
    Guitar player?:
     
    Ty Ford, Jun 7, 2007
    #7
  8. Doc

    Ed Chilada Guest

    It would be cool if YouTube could write and issue a codec as a free
    download which would render in exactly the format they need. Then we
    could experiment with it to see what looks best before submitting it.
     
    Ed Chilada, Jun 11, 2007
    #8
  9. Doc

    Ed Chilada Guest

    I noticed today that Pinnacle Studio 11 does this for Yahoo Video
    (which I didn't even know existed). I imagine it won't be long before
    a YouTube/Google Video version comes along.
     
    Ed Chilada, Jun 20, 2007
    #9
  10. Doc

    Scubajam Guest

    ********************************************************************
    I have uploaded several files to youTube, with varying success. My
    latest I experimented with mpeg-4 usind DivX encoding. I shot with a
    Sony HD camcorder (HVR-A1U), edited in Media Studio Pro 8 (Ulead),
    then created a Standard Defintion NTSC -DVD mpg2 version, which was
    189 megs for the 5 min video. Then encoded to DivX mpg-4, creating a
    53 meg file. The quality is certainly not up to your original post,
    but quite good, and much better than others I've uploaded, although my
    great white shark clip came out OK with mpg2 encoding. I'm thinking
    next time I'll mid-render to HD mpg file instead of SD, then go to
    DivX; should be even sharper.

    Your original example was obviously a professional clip, guessing HD
    cameras (because of widescreen format), and the pro house has the best
    info on specs specifically for youTube. I'm guessing they use a
    version of mpeg-4, which I have heard is what youTube uses, so there
    is minimal transcoding.

    See the clip I referred to with mpeg-4 DivX encoding at


    Search youTube for scubajam to see my other clips, some older ones are
    very fuzzy, even though my originals are very sharp. Any 4:3 clip was
    shot with a SD camera; all widescreen 16:9 shot with HD camera.


    Jim McGauhey
    Washington State
     
    Scubajam, Jun 21, 2007
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.