Tracks done, videos done, now how to upload high quality to Youtube?

[pressthekey]

Any skilled Youtubers here?

 

Got videos of band but not sure what framerates, compression, Avi or Mpeg to use to get high quality video up on Youtube, don't want to put up low quality stuff like you sometimes see. Any tips or advice really appreciated.

 

Any other sites similar to Youtube?

[techristian]

One thing is for sure. You will need the Java uploader and Java Enabled to upload large files. Also , expect lots of wasted bandwidth and multiple upload re-tries . mp4 seems to be the format that youtube will convert your videos to.

 

Dan

[Jeff da Weasel]

Any skilled Youtubers here?

 

Hello.

 

Got videos of band but not sure what framerates, compression, Avi or Mpeg to use to get high quality video up on Youtube, don't want to put up low quality stuff like you sometimes see. Any tips or advice really appreciated.

 

I'm not sure what kind of editing software you use, so I can't get too specific. For my videos, I use iMovie, and I export the final edit as a "large movie", which registers on YouTube as 720p (that's fine for me; I could go even larger for 1080p but I don't find it makes a lot of difference even at full screen).

 

Unlike Dan above, I never have any trouble uploading large files using the standard uploader and never have to re-upload anything. Here's one of my music vids for reference...

 

[video=youtube;WRPauvLWIPE]

[blue2blue]

One thing is for sure. You will need the Java uploader and Java Enabled to upload large files. Also , expect lots of wasted bandwidth and multiple upload re-tries . mp4 seems to be the format that youtube will convert your videos to. Dan

I've been able to upload files over 1 GB* to them directly from the browser -- but that may vary depending on one's upstream. If your upstream breaks up a lot, using their uploader app probably is the only way to go.

 

 

YouTube's Handbook (http://www.youtube.com/t/yt_handbook_produce) lists this info -- but it's clearly out of date -- since it doesn't even address HD formats... ( )

 

Best Formats for Uploading YouTube can accept almost any video format for upload, but for most users we have found the following settings give the best results. Video Format: H.264, MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 preferred Aspect Ratio: Native aspect ratio without letterboxing (examples: 4:3, 16:9) Resolution: 640x360 (16:9) or 480x360 (4:3) recommended Audio Format: MP3 or AAC preferred Frames per second: 30 Maximum length: 10 minutes (we recommend 2-3 minutes) Maximum file size: 1 GB

* I don't know if the 1 GB limit (it was 100 MB up 'til a year or two ago) still applies to most folks. My account has been approved for longer-than-10 minutes files for a while now.

 

 

YT claims they prefer the MPEG and H.264 formats -- and I do use the huge files resulting from H.264 at the highest rate, using unconstrained audio (since the codecs included with my NLVE, Vegas don't give any good audio compression options for the .mov container that uses H.264 and lower AAC rates seem to suck). A 3 or 4 minute vid in that format typically comes in the mid-hundred MBs but can sometimes go up to 1 GB or more.

 

But, honestly, I've generally had pretty good luck with the can't-get-no-respect .wmv format, as well, which tends to give much better video quality at smaller file sizes than the MPEG/.mov family formats. (But, at the highest quality rates with unconstrained audio quality, H.264, delivered in a .mov container -- all these different codecs and container formats get confusing, particularly since people often use terms imprecisely and interchangeably.)

[pressthekey]

 

 

 

Enjoyed the video and song, like the chorus a lot, that's the quality i'm looking for. The sound quality sounds top notch even on my little laptop speakers, what did you use to record the song? was any software used? i'll have a proper listen later.

 

I use Magix Movie Edit Pro14 for video editing, i've just looked at a video i'd done recently and here are the specs

Mpeg2 Framesize 720x576

Framerate 25 Pal

Aspect Ratio 4:3

Bitrate 15kbps

Video Encoder quality is 15

Whole Video size is 322 MB

 

Could anyone tell me from those specs if i'm doing it wrong?

[pressthekey]

 

I've been able to upload files over 1 GB* to them directly from the browser -- but that may vary depending on one's upstream. If your upstream breaks up a lot, using their uploader app probably is the only way to go.

 

 

Appreciate the info blue2blue, thanks.

[Jeff da Weasel]

Enjoyed the video and song, like the chorus a lot, that's the quality i'm looking for. The sound quality sounds top notch even on my little laptop speakers, what did you use to record the song? was any software used? i'll have a proper listen later.

 

In this case, the song is a combination of both the samurai and the sword.

 

I recorded this in a great studio called Sound Sanctuary, and it was tracked to Pro Tools with high quality mics, amps, and front-end outboard gear. But more importantly, it was mixed by Phil O'Keefe and mastered by Bill Plummer, which I think were the most important tools in achieving the sound.

 

I use Magix Movie Edit Pro14 for video editing, i've just looked at a video i'd done recently and here are the specs Mpeg2 Framesize 720x576 Framerate 25 Pal Aspect Ratio 4:3 Bitrate 15kbps Video Encoder quality is 15 Whole Video size is 322 MB Could anyone tell me from those specs if i'm doing it wrong?

 

I wouldn't say you're "doing it wrong", (and I don't know enough about Magix specifically to give you a better answer), but do tell me one thing: what is the final file format you end up using to upload to YouTube? In the case of my song/video for "Falling Down", it's an H.264 video file with AAC encoding for the audio. The frame size is 1280x720, and the 4:26 video is 311MB. The file itself is a .mov, which seems to work well.

 

Best of luck.

[Jeff da Weasel]

Oh, and one more thing: the video was recorded with my Sanyo VPC-FH1A at its highest setting, which is 1080p at 60 frames/second. I'm sure that helped too.

 

It's not an expensive camera and is lacking in a couple of areas, but the picture quality is superb.

[blue2blue]

YT recompresses everything you upload -- and sometimes brutally -- but how it does it often seems to depend on the content of the video. Unfortunatelyl if it squashes your video -- it often mangles your sound as well. Because I use a lot of 'animation' style images, YT often seems to think they can safely squash 400 MB of video into 10 or 12 MB. Sometimes the video quality suffers noticeably -- but what's untolerable is that it really degrades the sound with heavy AAC compression, which, in the opinion of this writer and others, sucks pretty bad. (Higher bitrate AAC seems fine... but 128 and lower seems to suck pretty bad.)

 

And that's why I hit them with all the quality I can muster (happily, my upstream is pretty strong, usually about 1 mbps.

[blue2blue]

Here's another page of YT info: http://www.google.com/support/youtube/bin/answer.py?answer=132460&topic=16612&hl=en-US

 

If you dig around, you'll like find more -- some of it contradictory. In my experience, YT puts up info and then forgets about it -- even though it's linked to their how to pages.

 

 

Nonetheless, I do love YT, warts an all.

[Jeff da Weasel]

(Higher bitrate AAC seems fine... but 128 and lower seems to suck pretty bad.)

 

Again, so many variables involved. One thing that I always do is when importing my audio into the video editor, I make sure to use a completely uncompressed WAV file at the highest possible quality. The one thing you absolutely never want to do is use a compressed file type (i.e. MP3), because nothing is more horrifying for audio than two sets of data compression going on. You often hear this toilet-bowl swirling effect on satellite radio, when they play an MP3 and then compress it again for broadcast.

 

(happily, my upstream is pretty strong, usually about 1 mbps.

 

Heh. My upstream is 20mbps, which is probably why I shouldn't negate anyone's statements about upload difficulties.

[blue2blue]

Of course. Running lossy compression on something that's already been through it tends to magnify problems. That said, I've found that better quality audio compression can sound pretty good even when it gets compressed again.

 

But, actually, I meant that 128 kbps AAC just sucks. Period. I think it sounds worse than mp3 at that rate -- although the hype always says otherwise. It's different tradeoffs, though. AAC seems to achieve a first-impression sounds-better effect by trading off poor quality throughout the spectrum for the impression of slightly 'more' high frequency.

 

I have a vid up on YT where I'd lost all but the audio copy -- a 128 kbps mp3, not even an 'advanced' codec like AAC or WMA or Vorbis -- on the old Mp3.com. I downloaded it and made multiple copies to different drives (so I wouldn't lose what I had left). A few years later I wanted to upload it to another service that demanded higher quality Mp3s (enlightened of them), I realize my salvaged copy was pretty not-loud by contemporary standards (silly me, I thought dynamics were important; it had an RMS of ~ -16dB or so... how horse and buggy) so I took the opportunity to 'remaster it,' brightening it up some and compressing it some. When I used that chewed on file (in 16 bit wav format, although, of course, it had been all the way down to 128, and that from an old 90s mp3 codec) for a vid at YT, I was pleasantly surprised by how unfugged it sounded. At least compared to how it mangled it 'should' have sounded.

 

PS... that is a fat upstream pipe. Dang. Charter brags about my downstream -- supposedly 10 mbps, but just now it tested at 3.7 mbps. Usually it's closer to the expected 8.7-9 mbps. Sometimes it's even a full 10mbps.

[Jeff da Weasel]

PS... that is a fat upstream pipe. Dang. Charter brags about my downstream -- supposedly 10 mbps, but just now it tested at 3.7 mbps. Usually it's closer to the expected 8.7-9 mbps. Sometimes it's even a full 10mbps.

 

As I believe you're aware, I run a little marketing business from Chez Jeff here in Redondo. That often has me uploading large high-res graphics and long video files (not to mention multitrack audio) from here, and I'm already insane enough without adding to it while waiting for an upload to complete. When Verizon put together a FiOS package for me and the price difference was about $2/month to get to their highest level of up/downstream, I bit, and I'm glad I did.

[blue2blue]

 

As I believe you're aware, I run a little marketing business from Chez Jeff here in Redondo. That often has me uploading large high-res graphics and long video files (not to mention multitrack audio) from here, and I'm already insane enough without adding to it while waiting for an upload to complete. When Verizon put together a FiOS package for me and the price difference was about $2/month to get to their highest level of up/downstream, I bit, and I'm glad I did.

You know, when my Charter cable internet bill went up $5 recently, I did the obligatory comparison shopper thing. My friends on Verizon FiOS seem to really like it. (But then they were largely coming from either DSL or dial-up. No wonder. I had Verizon DSL and it really, really, really sucked -- but I was 12,000 feet from the switching plant and I think they don't even bother trying over 17,000 feet.)

 

I figured I might even save some money. But when I saw the prices and bandwidths I was dumbfounded. I sucked up and went crawling back to Charter and signed up for another 2 year 'promo' package. (Verizon, of course also had a lock-in but the rates were, like, double for less bandwidth. Crazy.)

[Huh?]

Sorry to hijack somewhat pressthekey, I just wanted to compliment Zak's video.

 

Zak........super song.... nice video and editing, absolutely brilliant recording, catchy melody and nice lyrics etc. Good all around mate!

 

I really like the change right at "nothing left to fear"....where instead of landing on the the same chord from the last two sequences, it goes a 1/2 step above it. At least that's what I hear. Sweet stuff...and the guitar solo tone is really cool also, totally fits the vibe...... shades of Roger McGuinn meets Liverpool...all that good stuff.

 

Killer sound on the acoustic and the vocals. The ac. guitar really sits nice in the mix and the vocals have a super airy quality. Can you remember what mic you used?

 

I just read that you did that at a pro studio. I don't know what your home studio mixes sound like so I mean no disrespect, but you can really hear the quality in this recording. Nice work Phil and Bill also.

 

 

This has been the second self release recording I heard today that was really pleasant to listen to.

 

Good luck getting your video posted to your satisfaction pressthekey.

[Jeff da Weasel]

 

Sorry to hijack somewhat pressthekey , I just wanted to compliment Zak's video.

 

 

Very nice of you, Huh. Thank you. Like you say, this is pressthekey's thread about YouTube, so I'll send you over some info in a message (I don't want to derail this YouTube talk either... I think it's important for musicians to do this stuff the right way, since it'll be more and more important as time goes by).

[pressthekey]

Really appreciate all the info everyone, will be experimenting over the weekend, trying out all you've mentioned. Thanks to Jeff da Weasel for posting the track, sounds fantastic thru the studio mons, i agree, the vocals have an airy quality. Also appreciate mentioning what was used to shoot the video, i'll be taking a look at the Sanyo range.

 

Right, back to the studio.

[the stranger]

I've had good results uploading WMV files. I've been using Vegas for my last couple projects (railfanning vids) and afer doing some tests, it seemed like WMV was the best balance between quality and file size. Left Jeff, I'm rendering to 720p. That's what I'm shooting with, so I prefer to preserve that, but I don't really feel like uploading multiple gig files. My renders in WMV usually come in about 450 meg for an 8 minute video.

 

Shot w/ a Lumix FZ35 (tripod - 720p 30fps) and a Kodak Playsport (handheld - 720p 60fps)

 

[video=youtube;Cp1oIGh_qD4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cp1oIGh_qD4

[pressthekey]

 

 

 

Quality video, enjoyed that, i'll check out WMV.

 

Are these newer recorders broadcast quality? I'm kinda new to video recording but the quality of your video is very impressive, same for Jeff da Weasel video. I'm thinking of purchasing a newer recorder soon.

[Paul McCartney]

Make a H264 in 2000 kbps and upload.

 

 

 

 

here an example of a video demo song I uploaded as preview for an advertising agency:

 

[video=youtube;jPR3d1Qgqnc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPR3d1Qgqnc

[Paul McCartney]

{censored}, I should crop the edges

[pressthekey]

 

 

 

Outstanding, the perfect mix of visuals and music, I especially like the effects on the waves and water. What software was used? Very impressive.

 

On the subject of Video, do you know of any software that can do the retroscope type of effect? I'm also interested in software that can change Video into a cartoon effect.

[LiveMusic]

 

 

 

Cool! Seems a bit Neilyoungish or early country-rock. And that's a very good thing with me.

[Paul McCartney]

 

I especially like the effects on the waves and water. What software was used? Very impressive. On the subject of Video, do you know of any software that can do the retroscope type of effect? I'm also interested in software that can change Video into a cartoon effect.

 

 

 

I edit everything video with compositing programs, i.e. After Effects, no matter of what type the footage is. False colors are done with different in the compositing programs included effects, i.e. in After Effects with 'Colorama' processing.

 

 

'retroscope' is animated compositing, keying whatever you want, here some examples how to do that:

 

http://www.ayatoweb.com/ae_tips_e.html

 

 

.

[Paul McCartney]

MPEG-4 is the right video format to upload to youtube. That is also the video format youtube is using.