Greg Ondera
1
COW Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
H.264 runs like a two-legged pig in FCP7. Forget that third leg. The reason for that is that FCP7 has to re-assemble the codec on the fly in respects. That’s not the right technical term, but even codecs like XDCam don’t run as well as uncompressed video. Whenever you’re trying to edit compressed media you are likely to get problems, and I’m not talking about color compression but where the keyframes land in your codec. However, I’m am not sure, but possibly FCPX does the job.
Greg Ondera
http://www.Plexus.tv
http://www.SurgeonToday.org -
-
Video is 72 dpi no matter what, including HD but HD has more lines to work with than SD. Also the difference between an interlaced format and progressive formats are significant here. You’ll get all kinds of difficulties with resolving small type in interlaced formats. So setting the timeline for a progressive format at a high HD resolution is the first step. Or what about just using PowerPoint to do your slide presentation?
Greg Ondera
http://www.Plexus.tv
http://www.SurgeonToday.org -
Interesting they would want interlaced. I am an advocate of progressive as this shows up so much better on computers and LCD screens. In fact if you had shot interlaced then encoded it over to progressive, you would still likely have those artifacts of interlacing, the ringing, vibratory quality at the contrast edges and dark areas. And when encoding interlaced footage for the web, you’re more likely to get step-casing with fast motions. Progressive is the general way to go with original footage in my opinion, depending on the level of the photographic needs, and to hand them interlaced footage, simply codec the footage over to interlaced for them using encoding software like Compressor or Episode or Squeeze. If you’re a Mac person with FCP then simply bring the footage into a timeline and export it with custom interlaced settings. You should ask your client what editing or compositing software they are using and why they want to go interlaced. You might also ask them if they can handle progressive and codec it themselves.
Greg Ondera
http://www.Plexus.tv
http://www.SurgeonToday.org -
Craig is right about this. Throw more data at YouTube.
Greg Ondera
http://www.Plexus.tv
http://www.SurgeonToday.org -
Craig – What are your thoughts on recording compressed on the standard SxS cards then encoding to ProRes after? And with greenscreen, it seems like it would sort of artificially improve the footage?
Greg Ondera
http://www.Plexus.tv
http://www.SurgeonToday.org -
Well it sounds like you’re on the right road and as long as you take care of the production quality first, the encoding will follow. That’s interesting about YouTube’s recommendation for 8000 kbps because I think they take that and throw it down to 2002. I get my info for that from Jan Ozer’s new book “Video Compression for Flash, Apple Devices, and HTML5.” When it comes to encoding, I’ve been a longtime fan of his. Check out his blog at https://www.streaminglearningcenter.com/
Greg Ondera
http://www.Plexus.tv
http://www.SurgeonToday.org -
I’m not sure at what stage of production, editing, or encoding you’re asking about? And YouTube is not going to give you the quality; you’re going to have to give YouTube the quality.
If it’s lighting, I think that the separation light in these shots is on her shoulders, but I’d experiment with a second sep light coming over her top, because her hair gets lost in the background, and she has black hair. You can make her hair shine some with an extra sep light. The basic principles of the aesthetics of lighting are going to do more for you than anything else.
Since you have an EX1, if you shoot at 24P it will enable a little better quality for the web. But lighting is everything, if you want my opinion. Never shoot interlaced if it’s going to the web. Use progressive settings only.
If it’s encoding you’re asking about, the kind of encoder you use provides quality considerations. I use Episode Pro, but Squeeze is just as good and even better. Stay away from Compressor when encoding to H.264 because the quality is not that great. For YouTube I’d encode an H.264 Mpg-4 AVC in High profile CABAC peak rate with a bit rate at 2002 Kbps on the lower end, peak at 2402, and if you’re going to have this black background I’d not pass up crushing the black, but test this out first. I’d say crush the blacks by about 15%. Reference frames at 5 and B-frames at 3, and always 2 pass. Do not de-interlace since you shot it progressive. Is this what you’re asking?
Greg Ondera
http://www.Plexus.tv
http://www.SurgeonToday.org -
I looked a little deeper and if you notice when the spokesperson is in the shot there indeed is a shadow, so it could be green screen and likely is but it could also be a large white background. The closeups I imagine are photos and Photoshop. Wither FCP or AE can help you here.
Greg Ondera
http://www.Plexus.tv
http://www.SurgeonToday.org -
I don’t see any video on that page. It looks like photography and Photoshop to me.
Greg Ondera
http://www.Plexus.tv
http://www.SurgeonToday.org