Yes, the conversion seems running during the upload, the upload time was 6
minutes, I think the processing time depends on the file type/size and
Youtube server (whether they are busy or not).
The artifacts on the sky is certainly due to Youtube conversion, the
original does not have this problem. There was problem with the camera
settings, it was shutter piority, the aperture changes in big steps (1/3
stop?) that causes visible changes in brightness.
The control on the E-PL1 is not great either, it does not allow change of
setting during video shooting while I can dial in exposure compensation on
the 5D II. The sound recording level on E-PL1 is auto that is no good for
concert too. The current solution for good video recording and compact size
may be the GH2.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
> On 12/26/2010 8:38 PM, C.H.Ling wrote:
>> You may not need to resize the file or convert to .flv before upload to
>> YouTube, I just uploaded a 6 minutes 720p H.263 avi video (my first
>> YouTube :-)). YouTube will do the conversions, they automatically
>> generated different files size from 240p to 720p. It take time, the first
>> 240p was around 11 minutes and overall was over half an hour. Their limit
>> is 2GB and 15 minutes.
>
> Very close to my experience, I uploaded a 6 min. MPEG-4 file, 409MB.
> Upload took a while, but that's probably mostly a
> function of my local upload speed. It said to expect long processing time,
> but it was actually only a very few minutes,
> far less than for yours. I wonder if perhaps the processing started before
> the upload completed. Or maybe MPEG-4 is an
> easier conversion.
>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWBpj_Pf_uM
>
> The primary video quality is certainly good. The interplay between
> exposure changes that bring the sky and clouds in and
> out of clipping and the compression does lead to some odd effects in the
> sky in places. But if one focuses on the
> subjects, it's not noticeable. It would certainly be a great memento for
> any children present. I imagine it would look
> great on an HD TV.
>
> I do have the urge to put into the equivalent of PS to punch up the
> saturation a bit to compensate for the overcast
> skies. :-)
>
> I really should give the Samsung WB650 video a try in good light. With
> such a small sensor, I don't expect it to be
> great, but probably much better than the one I put up on YT, which was
> taken in low, indoor light.
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KmSiTsHaYo>
>
> It seems that not only do I have no control over the aperture and ISO of
> videos, I don't know how to find out what they
> were.
>
> Moose
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|