![]() During playback initialization the client side handshakes with the streaming server to negotiate what streaming codec is mutually supported. Youtube will re-encode to several codecs, and will preferentially use AV1 which is similar to HEVC where possible. Uploading ProRes might in some cases help mitigate these. Another issue is certain camera and subject motions if double-encoded via long GOP may exhibit jerky movement (not typical frame judder). If your material has any monochrome gradients such as blue sky, blue ocean, a red-lit room, etc, these are much more susceptible to banding. ![]() However there are other quality factors besides resolution, and these may only appear on certain material. However due to the above factors this might not be noticeable on most playback devices. Each time you re-encode or re-edit a compressed format such as JPG or H264, there can be generational loss. ![]() Uploading ProRes avoids the theoretical issue of re-encoding an already compressed video. They will typically use H264 or a similar long GOP codec. Note both Youtube and Vimeo will re-encode whatever file you upload. For 4k H264 it might be a bit low, so using Compressor to export a 50 Mbps file might be a good idea. Otherwise, the default FCPX H264 export for 1080p H264 at 20 Mbps is pretty good. If your ISP in Japan has no data cap and is on symmetrical fiber, you could upload ProRes, even if most of your viewers might be using mobile devices. Vimeo recommends 10-20 Mbps for H264 1080p and 30-60 Mbps for 4k. For DCI 4k, Youtube recommends 35-45 Mbps, and FCPX's default UHD 4k H264 export is about 30 Mbps. The default FCPX export parameters for 1080p H264 are quite good - about 20 mbps, which is double what Youtube recommends. I doubt many could see the difference between a ProRes vs H264-encoded upload when viewed on a mobile device. This has implications for encoding and upload. in Japan) it's quite likely the majority may view it on a mobile device. If your material is designed for a younger audience (esp. I think in Japan viewing video on mobile devices is even more common. In the US the younger demographic is more likely to view your material on a mobile device. This varies by your audience demographic and by country. documentary I edited can take 8 hr and consumes 1/10th of my monthly data limit.Īnother factor is how your viewers will watch the material. Just uploading one ProRes 422 copy of a 22 min. Comcast has a 1TB per month data cap (combined upload/download for all data, including NetFlix, Hulu, etc). E.g, I have Comcast 350 Mbps, but upload bandwidth is only 30 Mbps (provisioned rate), and it can drop to 20 Mbps. Non-fiber methods are often highly asymmetrical. In general fiber-served broadband is symmetrical - upload and download bandwidth is the same. This has implications for a content provider uploading large files. By contrast in the US only 12.6% are fiber. According to Dec 2017 OECD data, 78% of Japan's broadband subscriptions are fiber served. Part of the decision process is (1) Your broadband capability (2) Your audience's broadband capability and (3) playback and viewing method, e.g, mobile vs fixed. It rapidly becomes more cumbersome with longer programs. Filmmaker Philip Bloom usually uploads ProRes to Vimeo. I am here in Japan so firstly, 16:9 right and I have been told in the past it should be 29.97p rate.Can somebody please advise as to which would produce the best results in the end? Thanking you.Īs said, exporting to ProRes is the best quality. I'm trying to create several short documentaries including clips and stills with the aim of uploading to our vimeo plus account.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |