Youtube upload now plays with blurred faces.

Jim5519

Newbie Location: Toronto, Canada Joined: Jun 24, 2012 18:54 Messages: 35 Offline

Solved by

Dec 04, 2013 16:21

Hi Folks, I wasn't going to post this because I'm not too proud of the outcome, but I'd like some advice on what I may have done wrong in the formatting stage for sending the video to Youtube. We recently made a video to showcase a new song we wrote. Had some fun using a Green Screen in my living room. It was only shot on an SD mini DV Panasonic PV-GS400. Even though it is not an HD camcorder, I shot it in the widescreen setting that it has. The video was uploaded to PD 12 and showed in the timeline as Mpeg 2 Bitrate 7.95 Mbps Resolution 720 X 480 Frame rate 29.97-Interlaced. The green screen was very evenly lit etc. and the footage was good quality, I wasn't real impressed with the adjustments tools that PD 12 has on the Chroma key function but was able to get a pretty good quality finished video that was saved on my pc as an Mpeg 2 DVD quality. The faces were clear etc. But then I made two different size WMV movies so I could send to Youtube. One was WMV 9 720 X 480 30p with a 3000 Kbps bitrate and one was the WMV 9 1280 X 720 30p 6000 kbps. In both cases the videos all of a sudden had the background faces such as the drummer all blurry I didn't realize how bad until after I uploaded it to Youtube. I had uploaded the larger 1280 X 720. I would like to find a better Format and resend it to Youtube. Any recommendations and can you tell me what I did wrong when I switched the MPEG 2 to the WMV format? Thank You. Here's the link to the Youtube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiXKBtPa0rQ
Jim

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Dec 04. 2013 16:24

Windows 7 64-bit, 32 GB Ram, Asus P9X79WS MB, Intel Core i7 3820 Quad core CPU, Asus ENGTX 570 Video Card, WD VelociRapter 600GB 10,000 rpm OS drive, WD Cavier Green 1TB Sata 6.0 storage drive. Panasonic PVGS400 mini DV camcorder, Power Director 10

James1

Senior Contributor Location: Surrey, B.C., Canada Joined: Jun 10, 2010 16:20 Messages: 1783 Offline

Dec 04, 2013 19:38

Hi,
Once you start changing 'Videos" from the original format (especially going from lower to higher) then you get strange results.
I would have kept the cameras original size and produced at the closest frame size and dimensions as the camera and sent to You tube as You tube will do its own rendering. You may get away with wmv file on you tube at a decent video.
Jim
p.s. Just my opinion. Intel i7-2600@3.4Gz Geforce 560ti-1GB Graphic accelerator, windows 7 Premium 12GB memory

Visit GranPapa64's channel for your YouTube experience of the day!

Jim5519

Newbie Location: Toronto, Canada Joined: Jun 24, 2012 18:54 Messages: 35 Offline

Dec 05, 2013 04:27

Hi James1, thanks for the reply, yes I'm definitely going to stay at the 720 X 480 on the next try. But I still need to try some other things because even though I didn't upload it to Youtube, I did also render a 720 X 480 version too and I hadn't noticed then but the background faces went blurry then too ( on my pc not Youtube) The enhancing was making the video all choppy so I rendered all the other timeline tracks into a Mpeg 2 movie on my Pc and then started a new project with only that Mpeg 2 on the timeline and did a slight video denoise and video enhancement to that Mpeg 2 and it cleaned up real nice and then saved that as another Mpeg 2 which played really nice on Power DVD with clear faces etc. But then when I rendered that Mpeg 2 to the two different WMV 9 formats I got the blurry faces even at 720 X 480............................
Jim

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Dec 05. 2013 04:28

Windows 7 64-bit, 32 GB Ram, Asus P9X79WS MB, Intel Core i7 3820 Quad core CPU, Asus ENGTX 570 Video Card, WD VelociRapter 600GB 10,000 rpm OS drive, WD Cavier Green 1TB Sata 6.0 storage drive. Panasonic PVGS400 mini DV camcorder, Power Director 10

Jim5519

Newbie Location: Toronto, Canada Joined: Jun 24, 2012 18:54 Messages: 35 Offline

Dec 05, 2013 06:50

Hi again, since the original video footage is Mpeg 2 should I maybe render it to Mpeg 4 to upload to Youtube instead of WMV? Can I still keep the Resolution at the original 720 X 480? They recommend Progressive instead of Interlaced which my original footage is, are the PD 12 'WMV 9 and Mpeg 4 rendering presets' progressive? Or do you just recommend I keep experimenting? This is only the second video that I have edited and I am flying by the seat of my pants and I am not sure what is best for a Windows user versus a Mac user or if it matters. Should I try to make a custom produce preset? It seems like only some of them are editable. Anyways, any recommendations for this old truck driver would be appreciated. Thank you.
Jim Windows 7 64-bit, 32 GB Ram, Asus P9X79WS MB, Intel Core i7 3820 Quad core CPU, Asus ENGTX 570 Video Card, WD VelociRapter 600GB 10,000 rpm OS drive, WD Cavier Green 1TB Sata 6.0 storage drive. Panasonic PVGS400 mini DV camcorder, Power Director 10

Carl312

Senior Contributor Location: Texas, USA Joined: Mar 16, 2010 20:11 Messages: 9090 Offline

Dec 05, 2013 08:49

You can upload to Youtube using the camera's MPEG-2 video format.

Powerdirector can edit the camera's video OK.

You should output the edited video in the same format Mpeg-2 HQ (720x480 at 8 Mbps).

I saw one spec in PDF manual for Panasonic PV-GS400 that said something about webcam output was 320x240. I hope that is not the resolution you get when you transfer the video from that camera via Firewire (IEEE 1394).

The manual does say the video is NTSC. Which should be 720x480 30 frames per second.

If the faces in the front are clear, but the faces in the back are blurry, then it could be the depth of field is shallow.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field
Carl312: Windows 10 64-bit 8 GB RAM,AMD Phenom II X4 965 3.4 GHz,ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB,240GB SSD,two 1TB HDs.

Jim5519

Newbie Location: Toronto, Canada Joined: Jun 24, 2012 18:54 Messages: 35 Offline

Dec 05, 2013 09:03

Hi and thanks Carl, I didn't know if I should upload to Youtube with a Mpeg 2 or not because I didn't see it under their recommendations, but that's good to know I can send that because the rear faces aren't blurry in my saved Mpeg 2 version.
When I transfer the video from the camera to PD 12 and check the properties of those video files in my timeline I does read: Mpeg 2 Bitrate 7.95 Mbps with a resolution of 720 X 480, frame rate: 29.97 interlaced, so that's a good thing. So if I use that profile: Mpeg-2 HQ (720 X 4800 at 8Mbps) should I stay with interlaced since my SD camera uploaded as interlaced or should I change it to the Youtube recommended Progressive? I'm not sure how to deinterlace as they suggest.
Jim

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Dec 05. 2013 09:05

Windows 7 64-bit, 32 GB Ram, Asus P9X79WS MB, Intel Core i7 3820 Quad core CPU, Asus ENGTX 570 Video Card, WD VelociRapter 600GB 10,000 rpm OS drive, WD Cavier Green 1TB Sata 6.0 storage drive. Panasonic PVGS400 mini DV camcorder, Power Director 10

Carl312

Senior Contributor Location: Texas, USA Joined: Mar 16, 2010 20:11 Messages: 9090 Offline

Dec 05, 2013 19:13

I would stay with interlaced.

Youtube will re-render the video anyway. Youtube's player is always progressive.

You will find out if Youtube will accept your MPEG-2 video. Youtube will reject if it not an accepted format.

Carl312: Windows 10 64-bit 8 GB RAM,AMD Phenom II X4 965 3.4 GHz,ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB,240GB SSD,two 1TB HDs.

Jim5519

Newbie Location: Toronto, Canada Joined: Jun 24, 2012 18:54 Messages: 35 Offline

Dec 05, 2013 19:48

Thanks for getting back to me Carl, unfortunately I got anxious waiting and ended up doing almost a 4 hr. upload of it in the Mpeg 2 but I did it in Progressive not knowing any better. It just went up next to the other one on Youtube a few minutes ago. Not sure if I will leave it or not, I did make it a little brighter and the drummers face is less blurry but I now have a bit of white around my black pant legs. But overall I think it is an improvement. It's a little tough getting all those chroma key tracks to look perfect but it's a learning experience. It would be interesting to see what it would have been like in interlaced. I may just render it in interlaced to just to have a look at it on my Pc. I also upgraded the audio from Dolby 256 kbps to 384 kbps. Thanks again.
Jim Windows 7 64-bit, 32 GB Ram, Asus P9X79WS MB, Intel Core i7 3820 Quad core CPU, Asus ENGTX 570 Video Card, WD VelociRapter 600GB 10,000 rpm OS drive, WD Cavier Green 1TB Sata 6.0 storage drive. Panasonic PVGS400 mini DV camcorder, Power Director 10

Aus_Sean

Newbie Location: Australia Joined: Nov 27, 2013 19:55 Messages: 25 Offline

Dec 06, 2013 00:57

Sounds like it's coming along for you. eg, never bothered with WMV. Youtube will take almost any format and do it's own thing to play it, so I focus on a good quality up load so that it's worth watching in the future. Just do a search on "best format for youtube upload" and lots of content comes up.

Re the audio. Depending how you recorded the audio, it may be a waste increasing the bit rate. Whilst I can't foresee it doing any harm, it'd be equivalent to rending your SD image as HD. e.g. for a gopro, I think it's like 128kbps, but there audio is pretty awful, but it's irrelevent to bump it up.

vn800rider

Senior Contributor Location: Darwen, UK Joined: May 15, 2008 04:32 Messages: 1949 Offline

Dec 06, 2013 03:25

I got anxious waiting and ended up doing almost a 4 hr. upload of it in the Mpeg 2 but I did it in Progressive not knowing any better.

In the circumstances you outline, I would take a slightly different approach.

Your project is presumably edited and ready, barring final tweaks etc, but if your final produced format (for whatever player/viewer) is not yet determined, then I would take a representative range using the range selector - maybe a minute or two, produce it to a variety of final formats, see how they play in one or two PC based players, and upload some or all of these short differently produced clips to Youtube/vimeo or whatever and review them. Then decide on the final output format for the whole project.

It is very frustrating spending time uploading large projects time after time just to get a format that appears best when the same thing can be achieved with smaller files.

Cheers
Adrian

Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated. (see below)
Confucius
AMD Phenom IIX6 1055T, win10, 5 internal drives, 7 usb drives, struggling power supply.

Jim5519

Newbie Location: Toronto, Canada Joined: Jun 24, 2012 18:54 Messages: 35 Offline

Dec 06, 2013 07:05

Thanks for that, it is an excellent idea. I should have uploaded test pieces, especially now that I am trying different tweaks and formats.
I definitely shouldn't have uploaded the whole 1st video but my song co-writer friend was anxious to get his first video posted and now is afraid to lose the number of hits we've had so far if I change the video on Youtube : ) Thank you all again for the tips. Cheers
Jim Windows 7 64-bit, 32 GB Ram, Asus P9X79WS MB, Intel Core i7 3820 Quad core CPU, Asus ENGTX 570 Video Card, WD VelociRapter 600GB 10,000 rpm OS drive, WD Cavier Green 1TB Sata 6.0 storage drive. Panasonic PVGS400 mini DV camcorder, Power Director 10