Agentgates´s TPU setup with strange wavehill hump

[hartiberlin]

Luc,
it is 25 frames/sec in Europe,
but 23,976 is for cinema movies only
taken (shot) with old real film cameras.

For NTSC DV video source (interlaced TV video) keep 29.97 frames/sec,
if you are in a PAL country like Europe keep 25 frames/sec.

Keep the original video frame size like
720x480 for NTSC or 720x576 for PAL
and better go with about 5000 to 8000 KBits/sec for
the videobitrate.
Then the video will be much clearer...
Youtube will Re-encode it anyway again to FLV format with
their own settings, so it is important to upload the video already
with a high quality.
Many thanks.
Looking to see the real deal.
Regards, Stefan.

[gotoluc]

320x240 is pretty low resolution even for youtube, I would upload at least 640x360/ 640x480.  Of course if your source is lower than that it won't even matter.


Man just send me the video, I'll have it uploaded in 2 minutes. :p

I've been doing this for a while. From what I understand when I researched it a while back is Youtube will convert it to 320 x 240 so it's best to send it in a format that minimum re-encoding will occur on their side. Their audio is also 22050

No point in uploading a huge file that will end up being re-encoded to something much smaller. Saves much time on uploading and bandwidth

Luc

[gotoluc]

Luc,
it is 25 frames/sec in Europe,
but 23,976 is for cinema movies only
taken (shot) with old real film cameras.

For NTSC DV video source (interlaced TV video) keep 29.97 frames/sec,
if you are in a PAL country like Europe keep 25 frames/sec.

Keep the original video frame size like
720x480 for NTSC or 720x576 for PAL
and better go with about 5000 to 8000 KBits/sec for
the videobitrate.
Then the video will be much clearer...
Youtube will Re-encode it anyway again to FLV format with
their own settings, so it is important to upload the video already
with a high quality.
Many thanks.
Looking to see the real deal.
Regards, Stefan.

Sorry Stefan but that is not correct!  I know, I use to work in multi standard video and Pal video is 23,976 frames/sec... it is Film that is 25 frames/sec world wide.

I've also experimented in uploading high quality files to Youtube and it comes to the same quality as my recommendation except for the fact of wasting much time uploading and huge bandwidth use.

Is there a lack of quality in my video's?

Try it for yourself and see if you can see a difference.

Luc

[broli]

I've also experimented in uploading high quality files to Youtube and it comes to the same quality as my recommendation except for the fact of wasting much time uploading and huge bandwidth use.

I don't know when you did that but youtube supports an array of resolutions, so it does matter in what resolution you upload. It can go from standard to Full HD:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube#Quality_and_codecs

[gotoluc]

I don't know when you did that but youtube supports an array of resolutions, so it does matter in what resolution you upload. It can go from standard to Full HD:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube#Quality_and_codecs

Yes Broli I know they have recently offered better resolutions but why choose these for a demo.

Best to not waste huge amounts of time for a quality that most will not notice the difference. I always stayed with there standard video specs as stated by wikipedia.
Quality and codecs

YouTube originally offered videos at only one quality level, but now has a range of quality levels as well as a format for viewing on mobile phones. The original format displayed videos at a resolution of 320x240 pixels using the H.263 Sorenson Spark codec, with mono MP3 audio

Have you or anyone else here uploaded 2Gig video file size just for a demo? Is there a video quality problem in my videos that I'm not aware of?

Can we stop this nonsense and just get the job done?

Luc