Hey guys, I'm sure a few of you have seen I've started uploading a few videos from my GoPro camera to my youtube channel.
Well I've been looking around, and some of the footage on other peoples channels with the camera look so much clearer than the stuff I upload! I'm guessing the only thing is this can be down too is how I compress the video after I chop it up and export it with adobe premiere.

I've only tried a few different ways of rendering the videos. I can't decide which is the best out of these:

1. www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jloputOGmE
Format = .FLV
FPS = 50
Resolution = 1280 x 720
bitrate = (can't remember exactly, but probably around the 5 - 8000kbps mark)
Total file size = 206MB

2. www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_UOuT3FhPw
Format = MP4
Resolution 1280 x 720
FPS = 50
bitrate = 6000kbps
File size = 291MB


3. www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmB7F5KfoBg
Format = MP4
Resolution 1280 x 720
FPS = 29.97
bitrate = 15,000kbps
File size = 822MB

Here are some examples of videos that I think blow mine out of the water:
GoPro footage: www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo3M6EB8kmk
Karting footage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXyyyVjcvF0

I don't really care about what the filesize of my videos are when I upload them, I just want them to be damn good quality! Can anyone help me out with some settings I should use?

Doesn't look much different to me. I think the angle makes a difference in perception as well as the light quality. Llandow is grey at the best of times.

As a comparison, this one was uploaded as a raw file from the GoPro: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKGO4GXDV64

Recorded at 1280x720, 60fps (r4 setting I think) and then trimmed using AviDemux, no re-compression involved. I don't see a massive difference personally but that's how it looks directly from the camera.

The downside is that it takes all night to upload a single practice session!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg0XFwky75U

optimized for 720p viewing in standard size and fullscreen.

There's no point to upload videos with frame rates higher than 30 as YouTube will always decimate down to 30 or 25 if the input is 60 or 50 fps.

I always used Windows Movie Maker to compress movies. It's crap for editing (I'd use Adobe Premier Pro) but for compression it's very good. I'd always use the setting for "viewing on the local device/LAN" or something like that (been ages since I've done a video).
When uploaded it would allow me after a few hours to put it into 720p or 1080 depending on device used to record.

hmmm, in that case I should just render the videos in 720p and 30fps.. and just crank up the bitrate
I'll give it a go

What app you use to render?

For youtube, optimal is 30 fps / H.264 / CRF=23 (or, if you use bitrate-targetting encoder - 5 mbit/s)
StaxRip and MeGUI are good starting apps for that.. for StaxRip, you'd want to use something like this (settings):

(ignore the Resize setting, it'll change to video's resolution as soon as you actually open source video)

If you have decent CPU (sandy bridge smth) it'll take approximately as long for it to encode as video itself lasts.

Thanks I'll give it a go!
I've been using adobe premiere pro CS5. I've got an i5-2500 @ 3.30GHz and 4GB ram.. so I suppose it should be decent

Well I downloaded Cyberlink power director, has very good production options in there regarding sizes, formats, etc.
Could give me a 450mb 720p video in 18mb if I wanted. Not sure of quality but yeah!

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

Could give me a 450mb 720p video in 18mb if I wanted. Not sure of quality but yeah!

..what length?
450MB can go from 1 minute (uncompressed RGB32) to 1 hour.

4 minute video.

My comment does not affect video length. I simply said that a video of a given size could be made into a smaller given size when using the editing program that I do.

Shadowwwwww I'd expect you to have known this.

I'd expect you to know that output filesize doesn't depends on input filesize.
18 MB for 4 minutes is 600 kbit/s. I'm quite sure you're not sure about quality.. there isn't any.

No mr bond I expect you to die.

Well I'll live longer than you, because delta of my age and average life expectancy in my country is higher than same thing of yours and your country. Too bad for you

30fps is the highest YT goes, and 8k bit rate so no need to go above 10.
320kbps 48 khz for sound

I have used 6-8k bit rate for my YT videos in the past, encoded with Sony Vegas - with Sony AVC mp4
My average video that is uploaded, is between 100-180mb, and some are quite long

check out my GT5 vids for an idea of quality

http://www.youtube.com/user/CoolColJ24

Quote from CoolColJ :

check out my GT5 vids for an idea of quality

http://www.youtube.com/user/CoolColJ24

lol
proper H.264 encoder could achieve that with 2~4 mbit/s
just saying, nothing personal

Quote from E.Reiljans :

lol
proper H.264 encoder could achieve that with 2~4 mbit/s
just saying, nothing personal

What do you think the Sony AVC encoder is?

Half of them used the Mainconcept 2 Mp4 encoder. Which I feel is a touch better than the Sony one, but it's a lot slower and the Sony AVC is multicore and GPU accelerated.

I experimented a lot with different bit rates, and I felt 6k was the lowest rate I would go with 720p. 6k base and 12k peak with VBR.
Or 2k base and 6k peak for 480p

The originals are quite good, but quite blurry after YT reencodes them. Obviously YT encodes them at a lower rate than the originals, so why would I encode them any lower than 6k which would have obvious compression artifacts? Seems darker than the originals as well.
So I don't know why you said what you did, since what you see on YT is not what I uploaded codec wise

I've tried all the different codecs out there from WMV to ones that come with FFDShow, and they all change the colour/tone in various ways, which is unacceptable.
Mainconcept and Sony AVC were the best in this regard

Quote from CoolColJ :

What do you think the Sony AVC encoder is?

Proprietary crap

Quote from CoolColJ :

I've tried all the different codecs out there from WMV to ones that come with FFDShow, and they all change the colour/tone in various ways, which is unacceptable.
Mainconcept and Sony AVC were the best in this regard

Obviously you haven't tried x264 which is well known as being best H.264 encoder in the world.

In the world or just the internet sites you read. Were you banned from those too?

Ever heard of SSIM and PNSR?
x264 beats all known H.264 encoders by these parameters at comparable encoding time, and if you can invent some better characteristic to compare image quality - go ahead.

Oh, actually, never mind. You're talking about stuff you have no idea about just to look smart, like you always do. I wonder why I even bothered to respond to you.

I've not. I just download the odd movie. When uploading to Youtube which is what the OP enquired about, Youtube limit the quality anyway. Difference on a computer monitor would be neglible.

And I'm neither arguing your point or saying you were wrong. I'm just saying it's a bit weird how you got a perma ban and yet you're still here where as others who were in the same situation got repeated bans. :|
Ah well demo noob for you.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

Difference on a computer monitor would be neglible.

Yeah, but difference in uploading time between movie with 3 mbit/s bitrate and 10 mbit/s bitrate would be quite noticeable on typical British connection with 1 mbit/s upload (not as noticeable with typical Latvian connection with 100 or even 1000 mbit/s upload but that's another talk).

Quote from E.Reiljans :

Proprietary crapObviously you haven't tried x264 which is well known as being best H.264 encoder in the world.

X264vfw - H.264/mpeg4 AVC codec
^ yeap that's whats with FFDShow when you install it, and is one of the many codecs available when you render an AVI.
And it changes the colours, goes lighter and softer looking. Like I said I've tried em all, and done some pretty indepth tests before I settled on my choices

Sony AVC is also H.264 MP4... same for the Mainconcept
Mainconcept looks the best by a touch, but Sony is fastest with the multicore rendering and GPU acceleration in Vegas.
Videos that took over 30 mins to render with Mainconcept take less than 10mins on Sony AVC...

6k at 720p, plus or minus was the lowest that I found you could go while keeping the footage as similar looking as the original.

The highest bitrate on YT is around 8k with 1080p, so there is no point going too much above that

Quote from CoolColJ :

X264vfw - H.264/mpeg4 AVC codec
^ yeap that's whats with FFDShow when you install it, and is one of the many codecs available when you render an AVI.
And it changes the colours, goes lighter and softer looking. Like I said I've tried em all, and done some pretty indepth tests before I settled on my choices

I said x264, not x264vfw.
x264vfw stopped being updated looong time (few years, in fact) ago.