Rendering for Youtube, Vimeo and website embed with Vegas & GH-2

[Jesse James]

I'm new to HD format and not sure what video and audio settings I need to be using for Youtube, Vimeo and website embed. I've read some of the threads on settings and whoa that's a ton of info and a lot of work with more software. Is there another faster way to render with Sony Vegas 9.0 and the GH-2? What settings are you using?

Thanks

[Aaron Courtney]

there are render recommendations all over for youtube and vimeo, so i won't talk about those. but for self hosting, you're pretty much wide open in terms of encoding options since YOU control the file. if you haven't done some research in this area, i'd suggest reading up on html5 and flv options. ultimately, the player you embed in your site will dictate your options.

beyond that, it's flash vs mp4 vs html5 and this is the real sticky area right now with the absence of cohesive standards in the html5 world. we're all being held hostage to the ongoing litigation surrounding this mess and this is what is delaying the inevitable - a true standards based html video delivery mechanism. personally, i'm hoping google survives the bogus (IMO) MPEG-LA suit regarding .webm and its underlying codecs/IP. i think most of the newest browsers support the .webm platform (VP-8 & Vorbis in Matroska wrapper).

it's a great time for content creation, no doubt. but problems abound in cross platform, cross device delivery for sure and that's too bad. and this is what makes self hosting very complicated right now - even though it is the most desirable, most professional looking delivery method IMO.

[Jeff Harper]

Jesse, I'm so sorry no one answered your question. I remember when you made your post and assumed someone would jump in and I forgot about it.

First, it is no work or trouble to render for Youtube, it is as easy as pie if you record in Progressive.

There are two ways that I use that give about the same results: starting with either Mainconcept AVC or Sony AVC.

My bit rate is usually set at around between 10mbps and 15mbps, depending on the video. The less motion the lower the bit rate I can use. My files are very large, but they look fine when they are transcoded by youbute or Vimeo.

In my example, I use the exact same settings as my project properties, which includes 60fps, even though Youtube converts it to 30fps. I find the results are better for me when I let Youtube convert my 60fps videos to 30fps, rather than do it myself.

So you can use the settings below, and start with either MPG4 or Sony AVC. People argue all the time over which is better, I use both and they both look fine to me.

[Jesse James]

Thank you Jeff and Aaron for the replies. I've been busy building a new editing desktop and forgot to check back here. I hear you Aaron on there being no standard yet. Any word on the lawsuit/s?

I'll give those setting a shot Jeff thanks. I'm still in monkeying around mode trying to learn the camera, HD and how to edit it. Fun stuff like Aaron said.

[Jeff Harper]

It all starts with the shooting, as long as you start with progressive footage you've got the biggest issue taken care, that you won't have to deinterlace for the web.

[Greg Stout]

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

Jesse, I'm so sorry no one answered your question. I remember when you made your post and assumed someone would jump in and I forgot about it.

First, it is no work or trouble to render for Youtube, it is as easy as pie if you record in Progressive.

There are two ways that I use that give about the same results: starting with either Mainconcept AVC or Sony AVC.

My bit rate is usually set at around between 10mbps and 15mbps, depending on the video. The less motion the lower the bit rate I can use. My files are very large, but they look fine when they are transcoded by youbute or Vimeo.

In my example, I use the exact same settings as my project properties, which includes 60fps, even though Youtube converts it to 30fps. I find the results are better for me when I let Youtube convert my 60fps videos to 30fps, rather than do it myself.

So you can use the settings below, and start with either MPG4 or Sony AVC. People argue all the time over which is better, I use both and they both look fine to me.

Hmmm... been reading up on this as well. Interesting to learn that Youtube's 60 to 30 fps is preferable. Most of what I've read has said to let them do all the compression part so to give them the most uncompressed file possible (assuming you don't trigger some sort of max file size which I'm not sure of the figure)

So, wondering: are the files you're outputting already at the bitrates you specify, or are you compressing them for youtube submission? If so, are you doing it for file size requirements, or have you tried both ways?

Just a little surprising to read this since my guess would be that if the goals are to submit an acceptable file size at the highest settings possible to let them downgrade, the biggest waste of bitrate would be the fact that all the frames are essentially doubled... thus you can only get half the bitrate from the ones that are kept since the "extras" are eating up all the space to the file limit. It would seem at first glance that I could submit something with much more info per frame without any limit issues if submitted at 30fps. (Again, not exactly sure what their file limit is, but I've read several times that they have one) Does that make sense?

Not pretending to have the answer here, just trying to make sure I understand.

thx.

[Jeff Harper]

Greg, most the video I've uploaded were 720 60p to begin with. I do not really have a clue what I'm doing with web video.

I only know that when I submit a larger sized file, in it's native 60p, it seems to look better than when I convert it to 30p when preparing for the upload. I can only guess that somehow Vimeo, when recompressing the video, does a better job of going from 60p to 30p than I do. I don't know why or it if makes sense or not, it just seems to work.

My files are much larger than I should need to upload, I think. One high-end nationally known guy I have talked with uploads files that are about 8mbps, as opposed to my 15, and his videos look very good, but I don't know if it's just because his video looks that much better than mine to begin with, or because he also has the process nailed down. I don't have a clue. I just know what seems to work for me, and I know my videos take ages to upload because the files are unnecessarily large, but I'm so busy with stuff I don't have hours to play with it and figure out what I'm doing wrong.

Wish I could help with a knowledgeable answer, but I don't have one. BTW, I don't use Youtube. I use Vimeo and I have a paid account so limits are not an issue for me.

[Don Litten]

Same thing here Jeff.
I do use the preset in Premier sometimes but it takes longer to render than just making a 720-60 video to upload.

That silly ajax uploader has never worked for me and I still have to use flash uploader.

The OP can always ask the Vimeo staff. Then he'll know less than he did when he started.

[Aaron Courtney]

Originally Posted by Jesse James

Any word on the lawsuit/s?

I don't believe this issue has reached litigation yet, so i guess i originally misspoke. Pretty sure a patent pool has been formed by MPEG-LA most likely to determine the viability of a suit based upon infringement and that's the extent of it after about a year.

For the moment, I've given up on the self-hosting option since Vimeo Plus allows you to skin away all of the vimeo branding from their embedded player. And Google+ gives you access to YouTube's device-specific rendering engine (best in the world) without any YouTube branding whatsoever.