My HDV Ecode for You Tube Look Terrible
 

I have tried almost every concievable combination and have yet to get the right encode from my hdv project to put up on you tube.

The stuff that was shot and edited in regualr DV format looks great on the Tube. Not the HDV

JVC HD110u
FCP
Shooting and editing 24p

Any suggestions would be much appreciated!

Thanks

Phil

Youtube takes your video, and re-encodes it into a flash file, so no matter how good a video you upload, it will always look more compressed that it really is. It's one of the negative aspects to youtube, but it's also what keeps their servers running effeciently.

What did you upload it as? More important than what you shot is what you sent them to be compressed through their servers - there are various tutorials out there on how you can optimize your videos for Youtube.

Give this a try:

1. Create a new DV timeline. Make sure you've got all the Best Quality options selected for that timeline (High Precision YUV, Best Quality Motion, etc.). Drag your HDV timeline into the new timeline.
2. Add a slight sharpen and colour smoothing filter to the whole timeline.
3. Export your timeline using QT Conversion as:

H.263
Automatic Data Rate / Best Quality
Frame Rate 24
Best Quality (Multi-pass)
Size: 320 x 240
Audio: AAC/Mono/44.100/Better

4. Check to see if you're export is under 300MB. If it's not then you'll have to select a data rate that gets you under 300. Try and get to exactly 299MB if you can!
5. Upload the file. YouTube will re-compress it. Post a link to the YouTube file once you've uploaded it.

Hope this helps!

Chris!

I thought YouTube are now going to use H.264 encoding to work with apple TV.

Give H.264 a go on the upload and see if it makes a difference.

James

I found a video on youtube talking about compression for youtube. His settings using quicktime conversion are:

H.264
default frame rate
limit data stream to 2000kbps
single pass
size 640x480
deinterlace (very important)
AAC audio

I've gotten better results with this that anything I've previously tried. For shorter clips, increasing the data stream may help too.

I find the most useful feature when playing youtube videos is the button that makes the video smaller. Most things look a lot sharper that way.

Before YouTube switched over to H.264 (have they actually done it yet?), I'm pretty sure they used 320x240 for the final encode and then just scaled it up for display on the website. So, if you export your movie as 320x240, you can get a higher data rate than if you exported as 640x480 (due to the 300MB upload limit). Either way, try and get your file to exactly 300MB by using the highest data rate possible...

This advice may be irrelevant once they start using H.264 for everything.

Chris!

Forgot to mention...

This is worth reading as well:

http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage...ssor_gary.html

I read in Videomaker that if your video follows the above standards in terms of size and resolution and is all ready in FLV format and @ or below 100MB it will not be touched. This would mean you would have full control of the compression. I will try it out later and post the results.

YouTube does not currently accept videos in Flash (.flv) format.

Well that would certainly put a stop to it... hmmm..

I just uploaded FLVs to Utube last week. Although the FLV codex is not listed, they work just fine.
Jon

You tube is poor quality - try Brightcove for far superior quality - sure you wont get the same audience but then again do you want to showcase your efforts in a vhs/betamax standard online??

This would be the best way then, if they do not recompress the FLV.
The whole point of broadcasting on Youtube is to reach a wider audience, otherwise you could just set up your own Web site! Or you could do both, and point viewers from Youtube to your Web site if they want to watch a higher quality version of your video.

Here is a good place to upload for better quality...
http://www.dailymotion.com/us
Send your sh*tube viewers here for a nicer looking version.
Jon