Have now tried everything, but it is not possible with an output of the extension * MPG2. . . to get. And that is annoying because for example the possibility of HD video youtube reinzustellen u. S.damit link is that you absolutely h.264, MPG2 or MPG4 files upload.
Other formats will be of inferior quality play.
Why is that? Can Vegas Movie Studio 9 * no MPG2 files in the output?
Antwort von Marco:
There is no file extension. "Mpeg2". But you can as MPEG-2. Mpg output. This is the normal way.
Or - as I have in the other thread I mentioned before - take HD WMV. I've even for YouTube uploads have always WMV as the format chosen, with good results (but out of Vegas).
Marco
Antwort von meawk:
"Marco" wrote:
There is no file extension. "Mpeg2". But you can as MPEG-2. Mpg output. This is the normal way.
Or - as I have in the other thread I mentioned before - take HD WMV. I've even for YouTube uploads have always WMV as the format chosen, with good results (but out of Vegas).
Marco
How? If I mpeg for output indicates he throws me the file with the extension *. m2t from.
Now times have I handed in mpg and renamed it goes - that's a bit stupid that you must rename or what I do wrong.
Antwort von Marco:
Other template.
Why are not you trying times with WMV? Is also more efficient than MPEG-2.
Marco
Antwort von meawk:
"Marco" wrote:
Other template.
Why are not you trying times with WMV? Is also more efficient than MPEG-2.
Marco
been tried, much smaller file, but the quality on Youtube is then Sche ** - sorry you have to somehow mpg oh264 upload, so that the HD-story funzt ('ve been synonymous with one or other HD video then thought, oh, the grotte bad - jo, which looked so like the back of my deleted *. wmv. The focus of the test was in SX1 IS *. mpg and therefore synonymous looks good.
then again I invite the renamed (see in my last post) and look up.
Danke erstmal
Antwort von Marco:
What template did you use for the WMV?
New encoded the video at Youtube anyway. It is therefore only important in principle, the video even with the correct size and vssynonymous with the correct refresh rate are provided, so it will not again be scaled and interpolated. But if the WMV output as Socher is good size and refresh rate and vote on Youtube, then Youtube is synonymous the result be good, or no worse than with any other format. To upload a WMV s.Ende looks worse than MPEG-upload, then agrees s.anderer place what is not.
Marco
Antwort von meawk:
wundert mich ja synonymous. Everything is rendered in the correct format, 1280x720 and 29.97 fps (perhaps this is s.den 29.97 fps, werd da mal do 25fps, I had synonymous with the other *. mpg so - this may be?).
would you in . wmv 24 or take 25 fps?
Antwort von Marco:
That depends of your original format. That should be in this relationship is not changed. If it was 25 fps, then stay in any case at 25 fps.
A change to 29.29 (and synonymous to 24p) - if the original 25 fps is - will be visible with losses, especially with movements.
Marco
Antwort von meawk:
The original material is 1920x1080 30fps. That must isch but in 25fps render, otherwise losses through YouTube (YouTube HD FAQ). Therefore I suspect that my set of 30fps for the quality loss were responsible. Well, I'll see if I now make 25fps rendered pure, as the quality is. In any case, look at me very well.
Antwort von WoWu:
Quote:
That must isch but in 25fps render, otherwise losses through YouTube (YouTube HD FAQ).
YouTube in 25 pictures? Are you sure? Because the data say 30 images!
Antwort von deti:
"WoWu" wrote:
YouTube in 25 pictures? Are you sure? Because the data say 30 images!
Tu mal
Antwort von WoWu:
But what is true for now, because the word derives 30 images of the YouTube synonymous Page ..... http://de.youtube.com/handbook_popup_produce_upload?pcont=bestformats
Antwort von meawk:
"WoWu" wrote:
But what is true for now, because the word derives 30 images of the YouTube synonymous Page ..... http://de.youtube.com/handbook_popup_produce_upload?pcont=bestformats
This is in the FAQ of HD YouTube: The video frame rate should be the same s.the original where possible - up a sampling from the original 24fps can cause artifacts judd for example. For film sources to 24 fps or 25 fps progressive master yields the best results while videos that have had a re-sampling process applied transfer - such s.Telecine pulldown - often result in a lower quality video.
All tests other files, so no mpg or h.264 are more or less failed. Will read: cave Poor quality. Only one set of my video (MPG2 file 720p 25fps) I can of the quality on YouTube convince (ambesten seems to be synonymous when one of the German Language to English (UK or U.S.) recruits and then watch the HD clicks, then it looks really good). The others I gelich deleted. Sun is still just another upload a MPG2 file 720p 25fps - look like the will.
Antwort von Marco:
Youtube changes the refresh my knowledge of the uploaded videos if they are 25, 30, or 24 fps is. The info on the 30 fps is more of a greatly simplified Recommendation for "dummy users" who are also probably more on the U.S. market relates (typical case for non-covered and adapted translation). Because it is so "... for most users ... s.besten suitable."
The information / recommendations of Youtube are always with some caution. What is recommended for the upload, is not automatically synonymous, what ultimately makes Youtube. Who with the handling of different video formats and the conversion between these formats is reasonably familiar, does it better, the Youtube video and time to analyze their own material, which is thought to Youtube, then optimize.
Marco
Antwort von WoWu:
@ Meawk I understand ... but then you should write like YouTube but that it was in the original format can be .... and not in their instructions suggest 30 images so that you only through the question-and-answer game must fight.
Antwort von meawk:
"Marco" wrote:
Other template.
Why are not you trying times with WMV? Is also more efficient than MPEG-2.
Marco
Hi Marco, this is this morning failed: The grotto was poor quality on YouTube, although for me with Media Player osein super good quality.
Dat same material, rendered in * mpg (185MB compared to 50MB in *. wmv) do I just high. I'm curious to see if there is now the quality is right. Both versions of 25 fps, so the wmv, the morning poor grotto looked on YouTube and the synonymous mpg.
Speaking of "you can now up to 1GB instead of only 100 MB of upload. Possessions yesterday in the night (01:25 clock) 485MB gro0ßen to upload short film where - today at 12:05 I have to stop (?!), as still not loaded. I'm curious how long the upload the 185MB file takes? And I've 16000DSL, upload 750th
Antwort von Marco:
Which template did you render as WMV because used for?
Maybe yes synonymous Youtube (again) what s.ihrem Converter amended.
Marco
Antwort von meawk:
So 100MB is nothing! All attempts failed.
Now I ne * m2v file uploaded. With the quality you can live.
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=Pbyb0ws_PUw
Marco - I have the * wmv with the normal template in Vegas rendered 1280x720 25p.
After I try again ne mpg under 100MB reinzustellen
Antwort von meawk:
"Marco" wrote:
Other template.
Why are not you trying times with WMV? Is also more efficient than MPEG-2.
Marco
So hab mal was now very curious probiert, began with the MJPEG files for the D90 and then cut in *. mpg rendered. The file was almost 500MB in size. Was then too lazy because I have not saved the project had to start again in front of and in *. wmv to render, but have simply rendered the film again in *. wmv and rendered the times does not look bad - on Vimeo:
http://www.vimeo.com/2592902
Strange is, *. wmv on YouTube is absolutely not - grotte poor quality after the upload. I do not understand.
Antwort von Marco:
I find your observations very interesting. White of the vulture, which Youtube has since changed again. In the past, we are with WMV on Youtube very good mileage, so at times of SD and 4:3. You'll just below the Vegas Movie Studio and users always find recommendations based on good export as WMV-and upload format for Youtube's.
You've just seen Vimeo version and the quality is really okay. The fact that now the same source file at Youtube a significantly worse outcome causes, signs already pointed out that the times of WMV Uploads on Youtube are over, why always synonymous. I think this is a disadvantage in Youtube: It changes too fast and too much information about the operator gesäht are thin and vague.
