Content When you upload to YouTube, do you limit to 80000 Kb/s ?? - GoFuckYourself.com

CurrentlySober · 02-22-2022, 02:01 PM

YouTube themselves recommend you limit your render to 80000 Kb/s before upload. Pro editing poograms like Davinci Resolve etc, even have that as an option in the render settings...

But do you do that, or instead, prefer to give a better quality upload, to hope that YouTube gives you a better result?

Limiting lowers upload time, as its a smaller file, and with a bigger file, they say that youtube poocessing time is increased, as YouTube poocesses it down to 80000 Kb/s...

Swings 'n Roundabouts, innit?

But what do YOU say?

Wautier · 02-22-2022, 04:01 PM

I would always upload the lossless progressive version aka the master version.

Personally, I use the x264 codec due to its maturity, and I use the CRF 0 option (lossless) which creates as lossless of a version as possible (after editing).

YouTube's max upload size is 256 GiB which is more than enough in 90% of situations. But at the same time, so is 80 MB/s bitrate in typical situations, although there is no real reason to limit it to 80 MB/s or lower unless you have to -- for space reasons.

Visually speaking, bitrate matters. Limiting it in any way downgrades the picture quality, but depending on the resolution, and a few other factors. It's hard to comment... 80 MB/s for a master file MIGHT be an overkill for a 1080p source, but it might not be enough at all for a 2160p (4K) one. Especially if it has a lot of nature shots, etc.

So... if the space allows it. Definitely go for it.

I would store my archival copies in x264 @ CRF 0.

CurrentlySober · 02-23-2022, 06:06 AM

Thanks. That's pretty much what I thought. My stuff IS Nature Stuff and it is 4K. I know youtube is gonna process it down somewhat, but at least your answer makes me feel that I'm not unnecessarily wasting my time with longer uploads.

CurrentlySober · 02-23-2022, 08:07 AM

So, I've experimented with today's video - Results are:

Video is 00.05.06 in length, encoded via H.265

Video 1 Lossless:
Size: 4.80 GB
Data Rate: 13455kbps
Total Bitrate: 134451kbps

Video 2 'HIGH' Setting:
Size: 3.42 GB
Data Rate: 95634kbps
Total Bitrate: 95830kbps

Video 3 'Medium' Setting:
Size: 2.50 GB
Data Rate: 69853kbps
Total Bitrate: 70049kbps

Video 4 'Restricted Setting:
Size: 2.93 GB
Data Rate: 81912kbps
Total Bitrate: 82108kbps

No real comment to make, as nothing unexpected, but just thought it would be interesting to post my results...

View Poll Results: Limit to 80000 Kb/s or Not?
Yeah, limit to 80000 Kb/s - Its a quicker upload	1	50.00%
Nah, give the better quality - Fuck the upload time	0	0%
i cunt a4d2 upload 2 youtube...	1	50.00%
Voters: 2. You may not vote on this poll

02-22-2022, 02:01 PM	#1
CurrentlySober Too lazy to wipe my ass Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: A Public Bathroom Posts: 38,211	When you upload to YouTube, do you limit to 80000 Kb/s ?? YouTube themselves recommend you limit your render to 80000 Kb/s before upload. Pro editing poograms like Davinci Resolve etc, even have that as an option in the render settings... But do you do that, or instead, prefer to give a better quality upload, to hope that YouTube gives you a better result? Limiting lowers upload time, as its a smaller file, and with a bigger file, they say that youtube poocessing time is increased, as YouTube poocesses it down to 80000 Kb/s... Swings 'n Roundabouts, innit? But what do YOU say? __________________ My AI Handywork... My Dream Gal... XXX 👁️ 👍️ 💩

02-23-2022, 08:07 AM	#4
CurrentlySober Too lazy to wipe my ass Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: A Public Bathroom Posts: 38,211	So, I've experimented with today's video - Results are: Video is 00.05.06 in length, encoded via H.265 Video 1 Lossless: Size: 4.80 GB Data Rate: 13455kbps Total Bitrate: 134451kbps Video 2 'HIGH' Setting: Size: 3.42 GB Data Rate: 95634kbps Total Bitrate: 95830kbps Video 3 'Medium' Setting: Size: 2.50 GB Data Rate: 69853kbps Total Bitrate: 70049kbps Video 4 'Restricted Setting: Size: 2.93 GB Data Rate: 81912kbps Total Bitrate: 82108kbps No real comment to make, as nothing unexpected, but just thought it would be interesting to post my results... __________________ My AI Handywork... My Dream Gal... XXX 👁️ 👍️ 💩

02-22-2022, 04:01 PM	#2
Wautier pleb Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2019 Posts: 183	I would always upload the lossless progressive version aka the master version. Personally, I use the x264 codec due to its maturity, and I use the CRF 0 option (lossless) which creates as lossless of a version as possible (after editing). YouTube's max upload size is 256 GiB which is more than enough in 90% of situations. But at the same time, so is 80 MB/s bitrate in typical situations, although there is no real reason to limit it to 80 MB/s or lower unless you have to -- for space reasons. Visually speaking, bitrate matters. Limiting it in any way downgrades the picture quality, but depending on the resolution, and a few other factors. It's hard to comment... 80 MB/s for a master file MIGHT be an overkill for a 1080p source, but it might not be enough at all for a 2160p (4K) one. Especially if it has a lot of nature shots, etc. So... if the space allows it. Definitely go for it. I would store my archival copies in x264 @ CRF 0.

02-23-2022, 06:06 AM	#3
CurrentlySober Too lazy to wipe my ass Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: A Public Bathroom Posts: 38,211	Thanks. That's pretty much what I thought. My stuff IS Nature Stuff and it is 4K. I know youtube is gonna process it down somewhat, but at least your answer makes me feel that I'm not unnecessarily wasting my time with longer uploads.