VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11
Thread
  1. 1920 x 1080 uses more diskspace. Thats the only difference i know.
    I would like to film in the best quality and put it on vimeo or youtube.

    Now i am wondering :
    Is there a real difference in quality when you want to create videos which will be placed on youtube? Is it visible?



    Thanks
    Last edited by Baldrick; 24th Apr 2014 at 02:37. Reason: Link removed. We don't need an example....spam...
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member TreeTops's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2010
    Location: Oregon
    Search Comp PM
    No 1920x1080 on that video. Are you spamming us?
    Courage is being scared to death --- and saddling up anyway. 'John Wayne'
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member johns0's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2002
    Location: canada
    Search Comp PM
    First time posters linking youtube do it for hits so they spam forums.
    I think,therefore i am a hamster.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Spam in a can
    Status - Attacked by mold spores. - Pour out a lil liquor for all the homies lost in the format wars. Sanlyn will live again, a Sanlyn v2.0 if you will
    Quote Quote  
  5. Originally Posted by taxidriver View Post
    1920 x 1080 vs 640 x 480... Is there a real difference in quality
    Yes. Are you blind?
    Last edited by jagabo; 23rd Apr 2014 at 21:42.
    Quote Quote  
  6. 144p in the hizzzouseeee. weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
    Status - Attacked by mold spores. - Pour out a lil liquor for all the homies lost in the format wars. Sanlyn will live again, a Sanlyn v2.0 if you will
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2001
    Location: Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search Comp PM
    So the below examples may help...

    Recently, while I was spec'ing out cams to decide the resolution requirements for a job I planned, I wanted to be clear about what was the level of acceptability for whatever resolution I chose. Unfortunately, most comparative examples of resolution demonstrate the size differential (see below):
    Click image for larger version

Name:	LandscapeDemo-LayeredCombo-2160to480scale.png
Views:	20
Size:	2.23 MB
ID:	24737
    (note: this was scaled down to fit the usual browser window size, as a 4k width would be unwieldy)

    While this is helpful for certain things, it DOESN'T explain the comparison between resolutions in terms of equivalent full-screen DETAIL, which is what I was needing, and what I believe many consumers mistakenly ignore until it is explained to them. So here goes:

    #1 SD CIF or 352x240
    Name:  LandscapeCompare-SD240.png
Views: 202
Size:  759.8 KB

    #2 SD D1 or 720x480
    Name:  LandscapeCompare-SD480.png
Views: 204
Size:  831.0 KB

    #3 HD 1280x720
    Name:  LandscapeCompare-HD720.png
Views: 201
Size:  878.2 KB

    #4 HD 1920x1080
    Name:  LandscapeCompare-HD1080.png
Views: 210
Size:  930.5 KB

    #5 2k 2048x1080
    Name:  LandscapeCompare-2k.png
Views: 198
Size:  910.6 KB

    #6 4k 4096x2160
    Name:  LandscapeCompare-4k.png
Views: 195
Size:  975.0 KB

    All images are taken from a master 6k/8k still and sized down then blown up to equivalent frame sizes, using the same downrez algorithm and the same uprez algorithm. What you are seeing is a (~200%?) blown up section from the center of the 4k screen - just to the right of the 1080 overlay.

    I think this should make it clear to the OP what the difference between 1920x1080 and 640x480 (or its nearest equivalent here: 720x480) is - Quite a LOT!

    Hopefully, it will help others in their understanding of resolution and in deciding which way to go WRT cameras, rendering, etc.

    Scott
    Last edited by Cornucopia; 24th Apr 2014 at 00:52.
    "When will the rhetorical questions end?!" - George Carlin
    Quote Quote  
  8. I liked JaG's reply
    Yes. Are you blind?

    and Cornucopia's patience & explanations, as usual.

    So, in short,
    SiZE does matter!
    I neither prefer lemons (too sour), nor water-melons (too much work). I LuV apples (delicious).
    LOL!


    ================================================== ===========================
    Last edited by enim; 24th Apr 2014 at 01:08.
    Quote Quote  
  9. No is no spam. I just looked for an example of a video made with a canon 5d mkII. Thats the camera i wanna buy...I wanna work with an DSLR.
    I now have a nikon 90d. That filmquality is not bad but the 5d i much better.

    The problem is that if you place videos of 16gb on vimeo (i wanna upload each week 3 videos off 20 minutes each) you have to have a pro account.
    So when i do a quick count :
    With 16gb flashcard you can make a movie of 49 minutes at 1920x1080
    With a 16gb flashcard you can make a movie of 1h39 at 640x480

    As you will notice at 640x480 i can make much more films without getting to the 16gb/ week upload limit on vimeo.

    Thanks
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member TreeTops's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2010
    Location: Oregon
    Search Comp PM
    But it won't look as good as 1920x1080 and that was stated in previous posts with examples.
    Courage is being scared to death --- and saddling up anyway. 'John Wayne'
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member
    Join Date: Jun 2012
    Location: USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by taxidriver View Post
    No is no spam. I just looked for an example of a video made with a canon 5d mkII. Thats the camera i wanna buy...I wanna work with an DSLR.
    I now have a nikon 90d. That filmquality is not bad but the 5d i much better.

    The problem is that if you place videos of 16gb on vimeo (i wanna upload each week 3 videos off 20 minutes each) you have to have a pro account.
    So when i do a quick count :
    With 16gb flashcard you can make a movie of 49 minutes at 1920x1080
    With a 16gb flashcard you can make a movie of 1h39 at 640x480

    As you will notice at 640x480 i can make much more films without getting to the 16gb/ week upload limit on vimeo.

    Thanks
    What's the point of owning a Ferrari if you're only gonna drive it in first gear?
    Quote Quote