Youtube Workflow

[lollo]

lollo, do you have an NTSC version of our AviSynth script for preparing your AVI files for upload to YouTube?

The only difference for NTSC version in the script will be the field-processing (inverse telecine for 3:2 pulldown or other) and the starting height resolution (480 instead of 576, not relevant for the script)

For the upscale, there is no difference if you start from 480 or 576; you want a 4:3 square pixel image centered in a 4:3 frame at 1440x1080 or in a 16:9 frame at 1920x1080 (you have to add 240 pixels black borders on each side in this case)

[theseeker2]

Thank you! I will give it a try tonight.

[Alwyn]

in a 16:9 frame at 1920x1080 (you have to add 240 pixels black borders on each side in this case)

It's up to the uploader, but I recommend not adding black bars on the sides. YT will faithfully display whatever resolution/"shape" your video is, be-it square, 2000x100 or 768x576. Adding black bars to force a 16:9 frame will just look tacky on YT and VLC Player, and also, on a small screen such as a phone in portrait orientation, reduce the active picture size. The YT active display will also be smaller ( not as tall) when the side bars are burned-in.

Examples:

No pillarboxing

With Pillarboxing

[Krazern]

When i upload private videos on youtube, like vhs, i always upscale to 1440p or 2160p. When video is uploaded in 1080p yt still uses AVC compression while 1440p and 2160p use VP9 that looks much better for me personally. For casual users without many subscribers or views 1080p has worse quality than usual.

[lollo]

It's up to the uploader, but I recommend not adding black bars on the sides.

Yes, option 1 is better in general.

Adding black bars to force a 16:9 frame will just look tacky on YT and VLC Player,

With option 2 VLC does not care, and on YT you have black bars only when not infull screen mode, which may be irrelevant, except people like you hating black borders

on a small screen such as a phone in portrait orientation

Is there anybody in the world looking to a video on his smartphone without rotating it 90 degrees???

[Sunk]

When i upload private videos on youtube, like vhs, i always upscale to 1440p or 2160p. When video is uploaded in 1080p yt still uses AVC compression while 1440p and 2160p use VP9 that looks much better for me personally. For casual users without many subscribers or views 1080p has worse quality than usual.

Is there a real benefit in going over 1440x1080? I've seen people upscale their captures up to 2k and even 4k, but do they really win over 1080p?
Also, I'm not sure about the AVC part. My last capture, which was upscaled to 1080p, uses VP9 according to Youtube's stats. Originally it was rendered using FFV1

[lollo]

When i upload private videos on youtube, like vhs, i always upscale to 1440p or 2160p.

Which, with VHS low starting resolution, can introduce more artifacts than upscaling to 1440x1080 and use a lower quality encoder in YouTube. It really depends on the source.

[lollo]

Is there a real benefit in going over 1440x1080? I've seen people upscale their captures up to 2k and even 4k, but do they really win over 1080p?

In general no, but always experiment with your source

[Alwyn]

Is there a real benefit in going over 1440x1080? I've seen people upscale their captures up to 2k and even 4k, but do they really win over 1080p?

Clearly, for Krazen, Yes.

I'm not sure about the AVC part. My last capture, which was upscaled to 1080p, uses VP9 according to Youtube's stats. Originally it was rendered using FFV1

Interesting. How many subscribers do you have, and how many views on that video?

Is this a windup??

With option 2 VLC does not care

No, it does care. The black bars are hard coded. You obviously don't know how VLC works. Reduce the width of the player window and observe.

YT you have black bars only when not infull screen mode

No, hardcoded black bars are always there, regardless of screen size/mode.

[Sunk]

How many subscribers do you have, and how many views on that video?

32 subscribers currently and 590 views on that video.

[Krazern]

When i upload private videos on youtube, like vhs, i always upscale to 1440p or 2160p.

Which, with VHS low starting resolution, can introduce more artifacts than upscaling to 1440x1080 and use a lower quality encoder in YouTube. It really depends on the source.

https://imgsli.com/MjAxODY3

I took screenshots of one video i uploaded to yt in 2160p (used nnedi upscale) showing the difference between 1080p, 1440p and 2160p. It's a vhs that i tried to enchance. It's not ideal comparsion but shows bitrate difference. I dont have subscribers and only one public video. Jump from 1080p to 1440p is really visible to me.

[Sunk]

I suggest that instead of screencapping Youtube's player, you use something like yt-dlp to download a short clip from both the 1080p and the 1440p/2160p, take a screenshot in either MPC or VLC and then compare them.

[lollo]

No, it does care. The black bars are hard coded. You obviously don't know how VLC works. Reduce the width of the player window and observe.

I use VLC at full screen when watching video, and I rotate my SmartPhone 90 degrees as well. As everybody else.

No, hardcoded black bars are always there, regardless of screen size/mode.

You obviously don't know that the "active" size is always the same, being in windowed mode or in full screen mode.

[lollo]

take a screenshot in either MPC or VLC and then compare them

Or better with AviSynth/VirtualDub comparing frame by frame.

But, as I said, the approach used by Krazen may be (or may be not) better...

[Bwaak]

I use VLC at full screen when watching video, and I rotate my SmartPhone 90 degrees as well. As everybody else.

Once again someone claims knowledge of what everyone - everyone! - does. I am with Alwyn here. Youtube supporting non-16:9 HD is a nice feature over more rigid broadcast specs. I switch to horizontal view only when the video has too small titles.

[Alwyn]

Is there anybody in the world looking to a video on his smartphone without rotating it 90 degrees???

Also ipad.

You obviously don't know that the "active" size is always the same, being in windowed mode or in full screen mode.

What?

[lollo]

I am with Alwyn here.

I switch to horizontal view only when the video has too small titles.

I had no doubt

BTW, I already said: Yes, option 1 is better in general.

[Bwaak]

BTW, I already said: Yes, option 1 is better in general.

Yes, you did. Moreover, in your first reply you said:

you want a 4:3 square pixel image centered in a 4:3 frame at 1440x1080 or in a 16:9 frame at 1920x1080 (you have to add 240 pixels black borders on each side in this case)

So, your preference was clear.

Which is why your remark about how EVERYONE watches videos on a smartphone was completely unwarranted.

[lollo]

Which is why your remark about how EVERYONE watches videos on a smartphone was completely unwarranted.

Maybe.

But there is some interest to have 1920x1080 frame when upscaling, even if not for YT. Then the blackbars hater and video mutilator arrived and I went off topic. I shouldn't have answered him

[dellsam34]

I will be trying 2880x2160 on short clips in the future and see how it goes, I may have to encode before uploading to get the size down, At that resolution the upload time will certainly be doubled if not encoded first.

[Sunk]

I will be trying 2880x2160 on short clips in the future and see how it goes, I may have to encode before uploading to get the size down, At that resolution the upload time will certainly be doubled if not encoded first.

I assume it's the 4:3 4k resolution?

[Alwyn]

Then the blackbars hater and video mutilator arrived and I went off topic.

Yes, you did go off topic because everything I posted was true (black bars in VLC and YT) or a assumption (phone viewing) but you just had to come on and have a go at me, with you posting nonsense. I wouldn't mind if I was wrong, but I'm not; you needed to attempt to beat me down anyway.

Why is that, Lollo?

But there is some interest to have 1920x1080 frame when upscaling, even if not for YT.

Talk about going off topic! This is about YT.

[lollo]

Why is that, Lollo?

I don't, and I consider you a very nice and helping-others user!

alk about going off topic! This is about YT.

Correct, that addition with the refence to 1920x1080 frame had no relevance to the discussion, and I should have not mention it.

[Alwyn]

I assume it's the 4:3 4k resolution?

Not sure who that's directed at, but you said your upload was 1080P:

My last capture, which was upscaled to 1080p, uses VP9 according to Youtube's stats.

I've posted on VH and DigitalFAQ many times: in my experience, uploading with a height of 1440 or greater, regardless of the bitrate, you'll get VP9 encoding on all variants, even down to 360. But your video must be 1440 or taller.

That's why I'm interested in you getting VP9 for a 1080 upload.

[prodarek]

edit: if you want to stick to Rec601 spec for DAR, just remove 8 pixels from left and right replacing

addborders((crop_left+crop_right)/2,(crop_top+crop_bottom)/2,(crop_left+crop_right)/2,(crop_top+crop_bottom)/2)

with

addborders((crop_left+crop_right)/2-8,(crop_top+crop_bottom)/2,(crop_left+crop_right)/2-8,(crop_top+crop_bottom)/2)

Hmm I dont need cut -8, -8 if I wanna matrix to 709? I don't fully understand it..

[lollo]

Hmm I dont need cut -8, -8 if I wanna matrix to 709?

The original signal is analog SD captured in 720x576 where the active pixels are 702/704x576 according to the spec.

You change color matrix prior to upscaling, but this has no effect on the previous, it only refers to "colors mapping"

So one option is: crop to 704x576 -> change color matrix -> upscale to 1440x1080

[Sunk]

That's why I'm interested in you getting VP9 for a 1080 upload.

Well, actually, some of my earlier uploads are encoded using AVC1. Here are two videos from my channel dedicated to VHS recordings:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TuOfiLUjSo
This video was rendered using x264 with the following parameters:

ffmpeg -i input.avs -vf setsar=sar=1/1 -c:v libx264 -crf 18 -x264opts colorprim=bt709:transfer=bt709:colormatrix=bt709:force-cfr -c:a aac -b:a 192k -movflags +faststart output.mp4

If you right-click on it and select "Stats for nerds", you can see that it uses AVC1.



And here's the other, more recent upload:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNgwwinHkAU

This one, on the other hand, was rendered using FFV1:

ffmpeg -i input.avs -vf setsar=sar=1/1 -vcodec ffv1 -level 3 -threads 8 -coder 1 -context 1 -g 1 -slices 30 -slicecrc 1 -color_range tv -color_primaries bt709 -colorspace bt709 output.mkv

...And if you look at the stats for that one, you'll see that it uses VP9.

[Bwaak]

It took some persuasion to convince the BBC Archive to switch from pillarboxed 16:9 25p to native 4:3 HD 50p: https://youtu.be/U6NnSBG_tm0?si=TBnFBgeIN7mJ03sS

[dellsam34]

Sorry to go off topic but anyone noticed the round corners of the frame on YouTube lately? That might force me to add black pillars.. lol. I'm I the only one hating it? It took 10 years 1985 to 1995 for my family to finally buy a TV with sharp corners and somehow flat CRT, I hated the round corners of old CRT TV's.

[Sunk]

Sorry to go off topic but anyone noticed the round corners of the frame on YouTube lately? That might force me to add black pillars.. lol. I'm I the only one hating it?

I totally did, and it is annoying, I agree.