Davinci resolve 15 best export settings9/23/2023 ![]() Herein2020 wrote:I did more testing with the type of content that I typically shoot (big events, promo videos, music videos, etc.) so I tested an H.265 video in an MOV container at a constant bitrate of 16Mb/s for a 4K30FPS project and Linear PCM for audio. When I did my testing years ago the biggest quality difference that I saw was you pretty much never want to upload anything below 2K, even if the source project is 1080P, upscale it to 2K just to get YT to transcode it at higher quality. So for me, Google's recommended settings are in fact the best export settings and they represent the best tradeoff between time, file size, and YT quality unless DR's AAC bug rears its ugly head something which DR's team is hopefully going to fix soon. Personally, YT processing speeds do matter to me because I frequently upload previews for clients and time is money the longer it takes YT to process the preview the longer I have to spend waiting for the processing to complete before I can send the link to the client. The one exception is audio I switch to Quicktime and Linear PCM for audio when shooting music videos or something with a complex audio track because DR has a known audio bug when exporting AAC audio for certain frequencies. ![]() I don't see a quality difference or the need to use a higher bitrate or different codec on YT. Even with complex transitions, whip pans, speed ramps, etc. I get no artifacts with my 4K30FPS bitrate set to only 16Mb/s for my typical project and a long time ago I did extensive testing to find the best tradeoff between size and quality. ![]() That is not to say that if your project includes a lot of fast motion or complex lighting that maybe different export settings would be better so I think the best export settings are also dependent on the type of project. I agree with if you can't tell the difference then maybe it is not there. The video was 15min long and it took YT almost 2hrs to process it and I did not see a quality difference. I did more testing with the type of content that I typically shoot (big events, promo videos, music videos, etc.) so I tested an H.265 video in an MOV container at a constant bitrate of 16Mb/s for a 4K30FPS project and Linear PCM for audio. Since I didn't want to ask about hardware, I simply assumed they were asking for the best quality and ignored efficiency. Are they looking for best quality or most efficient overall? But then, we need to know the hardware, etc. So, really.the original question needs clarification. That said.they asked for the best for youtube (and Vimeo). But, a person could pick up an A390 (I think) for right around $140USD (last time I looked on newegg) and have AV1 hardware encoding. Nvidia's 40 series are just laughably expensive, so I won't even consider a 4090 right now. If I were to add an Intel Arc GPU to my system, then I could just do hardware encoding directly. That's probably partly because I run on an i9-13900k. For me, AV1 just ends up being the most efficient. I consider time to encode, time to upload, storage requirement, playback quality.basically everything. If you can't tell by looking it doesn't matter. ![]() RCModelReviews wrote:Also remember that "best" is the enemy of "good enough". I don't use Vimeo much so I am not as familiar with it but for simplicity I just use the same export settings for both platforms. they provide higher quality streaming than for the rest of us so it is impossible to get some of the quality you see on YT from famous channels if your channel is not comparable. Also, a lot of people don't realize that YT has two tiers of quality for celebrities, Hollywood, etc. If you are shooting fast action, sports, or something where every frame changes like a timelapse then a higher bitrate would make more sense.įor YT its very simple follow Google's posted recommendations and you will get the best quality, upload anything else and there is a chance that YT's re-encoding process will trash your footage. I like my bitrate at 16Mb/s because I do not shoot fast action or sports, so I don't have any macro blocking or artifacts on YT with that bitrate but I do save quite a bit on file sizes and upload times. I think it is safe to say that Google who owns YT will know how to get the best quality on their own platform and their own documentation says to use H.264. ![]() Of course Cineform or ProRes are better than H.264 but remember the OP specifically asked about YT and Vimeo. Might be what ends up after the inevitable re-encoding process. RNeil H wrote:Most of the folks I know of who want better Q recommend using Cineform or ProRes rather than H.264.Īnd those recommended bitrates are rather low it would seem. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |