Youtube Uploading - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 80 Old 01-29-2016, 07:03 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Youtube Uploading

Something that I've been going over in another thread has just got me thinking that maybe some or most of us might be uploading to Youtube wrong. That is, unless there is a way to upload it as full dual streams and let the viewer decide? (I seem to remember there was a way but I forget how to do that and now that I'm looking for it I don't see it...)

So with a SbS 3D frame, if you're viewer is watching your uploaded content on a passive screen, they would only get 960x540p per eye vs 1920x540p per eye if you rendered to T/B. Reason being is that the passive screen can't show you 1080p per eye only 540p. So instead of cutting the horizontal resolution as well as the vertical you're better off leaving the horizontal at 1920 and only show 540p to begin with. The result is clearly better on a passive screen with T/B with 1036800 pixels of resolution per eye vs only 518400 with SbS. In some recent tests on my passive screen the results were obviously better with the T/B. Strange, I remember reading this years ago but forgot about it since then.

Of course on active, it wouldn't matter, you're getting the same pixel resolution with either method as it can do 1080p per eye. So it would get 960x1080 same resolution. But to keep things consistent for all viewers T/B would be the best method of uploading.

Since 4k is here, it would also be best to upload your 4K content in T/B at 3840x1080p, that way both active and passive viewers would yield the same amount of pixel resolution. As of now, there is still no way to do full 3840x2160p per eye but with T/B all viewers could receive 4147200 pixels of resolution with 4K half-height 3D.

I'm going back and re encoding all of my digital 3D content to T/B that way it's the same resolution of both my active and passive screens. I've seen a lot of content on Youtube in SbS, but I think this is just wrong. Unless, like I mentioned above, there is a way for dual streams to be uploaded?

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 80 Old 01-31-2016, 01:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Tom, let us know of you results. You intrigue me to try some uploading test...will let you know.
3DBob is offline  
post #3 of 80 Old 01-31-2016, 05:14 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
I noticed immediately that T/B was better on the passive screen with a 16x9 full screen IMAX movie. Of course on the active PJ, both T/B and SbS renders looked about the same resolution and based on the total pixels that should be the case.

Here is an early thread that discussed T/B vs SbS on passive, I had to go back and read up on this. For awhile I thought that the passive screen itself was halving the width but that's actually done when you render out your SbS file. It's taking the 1920 and making dual anamorphic images (960x1080) The passive screen does in fact halve the resolution of vertical height but if you render it SbS then you're cutting the width too from the file itself. T/B will give the viewer 1920x540p vs 960x540p per eye. Again, on active the resolution is the same 1920x540 or 960x1080 so it won't make a difference to those that view your content on an active screen, but certainly there are a lot of passive 1080p screens out there and as we move on to 4k, it would make sense to continue using T/B so that all viewers on Youtube would get the same resolution.

It's strange because pretty much all the 3D Youtube content I've played has been in SbS, I've come across a few T/B. For some reason I thought there was a way to upload a MVC file and then Youtube would let the viewer decide which method to display, but maybe I'm not remembering right? Has it every been that way? I went and looked at the directions and it just mentions, T/B, SbS and anaglyph.

Unfortunately, I can't figure out how to rip my 3D Blu ray movies that are smaller than full 16x9 so that they are displayed right on the screen. DVDfab removes the black bars so there are just two images stacked, when T/B is enabled the overlap is about 10 inches apart on my 65" passive screen. The only way I can get it to work is by changing the aspect ratio in PLEX media player to stretch mode which will zoom and stretch the image to fill the entire screen and then it works. But obviously, that isn't ideal. I'd rather have it in the correct AR. I haven't tried original content from VP or PD. I seem to remember rendering some T/B from there and it played fine, but the content was full screen 16x9, not 2.35. So for 16x9 content, which is what pretty much everyone is doing here anyway, it shouldn't be an issue. Just be aware if you crop to 2.35 or smaller than 1.78 it may not overlap right. Trying to find a solution for this issue so I can go back and change all my digital copies to T/B, but haven't found a solution yet. But here shortly I'm going to go back on all of my own 3D content and render out T/B files to replace the SbS. I don't play much content on the passive screen anymore but I'd like the same resolution if I do.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
 
post #4 of 80 Old 01-31-2016, 11:53 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 12,404
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1313 Post(s)
Liked: 373
Tom, there is a time for T/B and SBS and you are on the right track with your thinking. But considering you don't have control over how someone will view a YT upload, and that YT is going to re-encode your upload to their format anyway, the issue is really a waste of time. Besides, most people viewing YT, even 3D are more interested in the content, not the rendering format.

In the early days of 3D everything was active so SBS became the format of choice. When Passive came along more people had an interest in rendering to T/B for the reasons you state. But that was for internal viewing, not YT. Personally, I don't think it matters because you don't know your audience for YT. I'd bet most people are viewing with anaglyph colored glasses. How many are viewing 3D YT with the 3D YT app on a passive smart monitor? It's not easy because of all the hoops one has to jump through to watch on a passive 3D TV unless it is a very recent model. I have a relative who bought a Vizio a couple years ago and use an Apple TV box for internet content. When I showed them how to view YT 3D, they just looked at me like I was nuts to go through all those setup steps. Today with the new YT player it is much easier, but they usually just select 2D.

My 3D videos and more
Don Landis HT System: Projector Sony VPL VW665ES Players: Samsung UBD K8500 OPPO BD93 Sony BDP S6200 All Regions Player Denon AVR 4311ci, 7.1 JBL Professional series and Klipsch PS3, XBOX360, Dish VIP722K; 3D Edit Suite: Edius7.53, Vegas Pro v13, Power Director15, i7-950, LG 3D TV DM2752
Don Landis is online now  
post #5 of 80 Old 02-01-2016, 06:50 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
I can't see it would be any more hoops than an active screen for 3D setup and there are at least just as many passive screens as active, if not more. I'm just looking at it from quality standpoint for best resolution. I'm pretty sure most passive 3D screens are smart screens, so they have the youtube app built in, but you could always hook up an external device too, but even then T/B would still be the better choice. However passive owners are watching Youtube, they're watching Youtube somehow.

Yes, many don't even know 3D exists, but I'm sure many do. I'm mainly just stating that T/B would be better for Youtube than SbS, in fact SbS shouldn't even be an option. But it's not like you have to go back and delete what you've uploaded, just upload a new T/B video and place comments and annotations on the SbS video directing passive viewers to the T/B version for higher quality for their screen. Then going forward, just use T/B.

But everyone can do what they want. I'm going that route as it would appear to make more sense.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #6 of 80 Old 02-01-2016, 07:19 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 12,404
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1313 Post(s)
Liked: 373
I agree with you Tom going forward better to do T/B except that from my experience, 1. People don't care and 2. the difference isn't so obvious that after YT gets done with their re-encoding, the final results don't display the difference you may see direct from the original file.

If you can set up a double blind test for viewers to vote on. I might change my opinion. For now, I just don't seeing it matters. Better to focus on your content. Besides, everything I have seen on compatible 3D is SBS as the format of choice by YT. I may put a video up myself the next time in TB just to see. Always game to experiment.
Barry C likes this.

My 3D videos and more
Don Landis HT System: Projector Sony VPL VW665ES Players: Samsung UBD K8500 OPPO BD93 Sony BDP S6200 All Regions Player Denon AVR 4311ci, 7.1 JBL Professional series and Klipsch PS3, XBOX360, Dish VIP722K; 3D Edit Suite: Edius7.53, Vegas Pro v13, Power Director15, i7-950, LG 3D TV DM2752
Don Landis is online now  
post #7 of 80 Old 02-01-2016, 08:39 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
I've loaded videos to VIMEO in SBS just to keep them there and the quality is HD. Of course, I have to set my monitor to SBS so they get converted. But, since my monitor is passive 3D, I will try the T/B approach in the future.
3DBob is offline  
post #8 of 80 Old 02-01-2016, 06:30 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
PASSIVE SBS (Side by Side) vs T/B (Top Bottom) Test


SBS:

https://youtu.be/zkbzMhMzPMQ?list=PL...e7TzFcy65lVlTy


T/B:

https://youtu.be/tgKSqyUGj6k?list=PL...e7TzFcy65lVlTy

I played these locally, not from YT yet but I noticed there is more detail with T/B and SbS creates some aliasing that I didn't notice with T/B. Let me know what you guys see.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #9 of 80 Old 02-02-2016, 06:41 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Tom, I played both on my passive 27" monitor. I selected stats for Nerds (right click the screen) and for SBS data rate was 28MBS and for the T/B was 29MBS, which might indicate more detail coming through for T/B possibly. They both showed well and perhaps the T/B showed a bit more detail. The screens did not offer a 3D selection, so I had the monitor select. I didn't notice the aliasing. Interesting that these played as such a high data rate as I normally get about 4MBS with my stereo downloads.


The quality and the stereo depth are great, what camera and editing software did you use?
3DBob is offline  
post #10 of 80 Old 02-02-2016, 08:46 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Oh, forgot to post that stuff. That was shot with the Z10k, it was mostly indoor shots so I didn't bother to take the 3DA1 as it's not very good in low light. Edited in VP with some color correction and grading. The render outputs I kept exact same for specs so they should be pretty close overall on active screens.

The bit rates should be about the same coming thru, but since the horizontal resolution is half on SbS and it also cuts the vertical there should be noticeable improvement with T/B on passive. Since it's mostly low light it might be a litter harder to tell the difference.

I'm going to do another test with outdoor material from another project. It was shot with 3DA1. I couldn't do a blind test, obviously since you can see what it is before you play it and you have to select the method of 3D. I'm remembering back now for uploading, it was because Safari would hide the controls for 3D after viewing and you had to delete cookies or something to get it back on the player for 3D selection. But I don't think there was any way to upload an MVC file, or was there? If it does, then I guess that would be the best way to upload and let the viewer decide. I've only uploaded in either SbS or T/B.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #11 of 80 Old 02-02-2016, 09:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
You can upload in SBS or T/B and select it as a 3D video. That will tell youtube to convert. Problem is most browsers now have HTML5 running, and the only way to get rid of that is to delete browser cookies, close the browser and restart, or even do a computer reboot. Then you have to embed the video, not just link to it. I found that works on AVSforum embedded, but when I link direct to a video, I don't see the 3D selection options. Also, I think now, Youtube is going to HTML5, and all you can select is 3D anaglyph or as my son calls it: analcrap.
3DBob is offline  
post #12 of 80 Old 02-02-2016, 12:52 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Ok, I see in advanced settings there is a box to check, "this video is 3d". It worked for SBS but the T/B it doesn't have T/B format listed so I can't select it for T/B. Really, I can't see the point of selecting that it's 3D. It only converts it to anaglyph as another usable format, so no loss there. But if it converted it from SBS to T/B the resolution would still be lost. The only advantage is that you can view in 2D but that means half HD resolution when it's converted, better to just upload a second full HD version. The only problem with HTML5 is there's no 1080p option so you have to disable it if you're using it. I think I'll just leave my 3D video's as just 2D, non selected 3D. Anyone can see for the video which format it is and possibly in the title too. If Flash goes away, and I hope it does soon, they just need to update HTML5 to allow streaming higher resolutions. The 3D options are really pointless from the Flash player anyway.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #13 of 80 Old 02-02-2016, 12:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post
Ok, I see in advanced settings there is a box to check, "this video is 3d". It worked for SBS but the T/B it doesn't have T/B format listed so I can't select it for T/B. Really, I can't see the point of selecting that it's 3D. It only converts it to anaglyph as another usable format, so no loss there. But if it converted it from SBS to T/B the resolution would still be lost. The only advantage is that you can view in 2D but that means half HD resolution when it's converted, better to just upload a second full HD version. The only problem with HTML5 is there's no 1080p option so you have to disable it if you're using it. I think I'll just leave my 3D video's as just 2D, non selected 3D. Anyone can see for the video which format it is and possibly in the title too. If Flash goes away, and I hope it does soon, they just need to update HTML5 to allow streaming higher resolutions. The 3D options are really pointless from the Flash player anyway.
I tend to agree with you Tom. If anyone really wants 3D, they are probably using a 3D monitor or projector that will do the conversion for them...
3DBob is offline  
post #14 of 80 Old 02-02-2016, 01:44 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
One more test. This was shot with Panasonic AG-3DA1. I edited in VP, no color correction, and 28 mbps output, same as previous video.

SBS:


T/B:


This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #15 of 80 Old 02-02-2016, 01:45 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Tom, it didn't embed the link correctly--can still access it though.
3DBob is offline  
post #16 of 80 Old 02-02-2016, 01:50 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
I think I got it fixed...fingers crossed.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #17 of 80 Old 02-03-2016, 09:42 AM
Senior Member
 
SoToS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 226
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Liked: 68
The quality is great for a video uploaded to YouTube, the content and music choice too.
Still, at 4mbps for the second pair you obviously get a softer image which makes it harder to compare. Not to mention YouTube's re-encoding which always softens the image.
Of course it depends on the content too.
Have you tried to upload at a very high bitrate (as YouTube recommends)? It would be slow though. Also, shooting a resolution chart would be interesting.
SoToS is offline  
post #18 of 80 Old 02-03-2016, 10:23 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoToS View Post
The quality is great for a video uploaded to YouTube, the content and music choice too.
Still, at 4mbps for the second pair you obviously get a softer image which makes it harder to compare. Not to mention YouTube's re-encoding which always softens the image.
Of course it depends on the content too.
Have you tried to upload at a very high bitrate (as YouTube recommends)? It would be slow though. Also, shooting a resolution chart would be interesting.
They were uploaded at the same rate, so shouldn't be any different. 28mbps. I'll take a look at the specs again, to see what's going on.

EDIT:

Ok, that's odd. I went back and checked the first pair's stats and now they're showing 4.5mbps also. I'm wondering if there was still some back end processing going on with YT after I uploaded. I know I checked it then and it showed 28mbps, but now it's 4.5mbps same as the new pair. I wouldn't expect YT to allow that high of a bit rate, unless it was some other fluke. I think it just wasn't done processing so it played it at the uploaded data rate would be my guess.

This line intentionally left blank.

Last edited by tomtastic; 02-03-2016 at 10:35 AM.
tomtastic is offline  
post #19 of 80 Old 02-03-2016, 10:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post
They were uploaded at the same rate, so shouldn't be any different. 28mbps. I'll take a look at the specs again, to see what's going on.

EDIT:

Ok, that's odd. I went back and checked the first pair's stats and now they're showing 4.5mbps also. I'm wondering if there was still some back end processing going on with YT after I uploaded. I know I checked it then and it showed 28mbps, but now it's 4.5mbps same as the new pair. I wouldn't expect YT to allow that high of a bit rate, unless it was some other fluke. I think it just wasn't done processing so it played it at the uploaded data rate would be my guess.

Yeah, that is weird. When I watched the first time they showed at 28mbps too. Now they are back to normal 4-5Mbps.


Update: Just watched the last one again and was showing 9+ MBps.

Last edited by 3DBob; 02-03-2016 at 10:50 AM.
3DBob is offline  
post #20 of 80 Old 02-03-2016, 11:32 AM
Senior Member
 
SoToS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 226
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Liked: 68
I just downloaded the 1080p mp4 versions with the Internet Download Manager and checked their specs with Mediainfo (tree view).

For example:

Spoiler!
SoToS is offline  
post #21 of 80 Old 02-03-2016, 11:54 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Idk, only thing I can think of is maybe YT plays the uploaded file first for a time. It used to process it on the spot when you uploaded, but I'm wondering if they went to a batch process method. It gets processed in a queue so it might take awhile but at some point the original uploaded file is replaced with the YT processed mp4. I know for a fact it's not the same file because I uploaded it as a wmv at 28mbps. And that's what it showed on YT after I played it, but now they are all at 4.5 mbps.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #22 of 80 Old 02-03-2016, 02:47 PM
Senior Member
 
SoToS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 226
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomtastic View Post
Idk, only thing I can think of is maybe YT plays the uploaded file first for a time. It used to process it on the spot when you uploaded, but I'm wondering if they went to a batch process method. It gets processed in a queue so it might take awhile but at some point the original uploaded file is replaced with the YT processed mp4. I know for a fact it's not the same file because I uploaded it as a wmv at 28mbps. And that's what it showed on YT after I played it, but now they are all at 4.5 mbps.
WMV is inferior to AVC (AVC is by far superior to any known compression format including XVID, VP8 etc). Use only AVC (h.264) or even better x.264, an open and free version of h.264 via free tools that support it.

The best encoder that uses x.264 (which I have used for many YouTube encodes) is MEGUI. Although I have used it exclusively via the Avisynth framework (free, script-based simultaneous post-processing on the fly while feeding an encoder like MEGUI), you can skip feeding it with a script and feed it with the file directly instead.
The more you learn the more control you'll have over its quality and by using a script you can eg fit a 4:3 video to 16:9, resize, crop, add filters like sharpness, combine two videos to TAB or SBS, convert frame rate, etc -all simultaneously while compressing.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/megui/

http://avisynth.nl/index.php/Main_Page

You can also google and find a lot of resources and support about using Avisynth from its contributors if you want to get deeper.


BTW, in case you haven't seen it yet, here is YouTube's recommendations:
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1722171?hl=en

Last edited by SoToS; 02-03-2016 at 02:56 PM.
SoToS is offline  
post #23 of 80 Old 02-03-2016, 03:15 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
In Vegas Pro there's isn't an option for avc/main concept with 5.1 audio, so I've been using wmv lately and then remuxing into mp4. There was also a bug in a higher build that caused the SbS render to wobble so had to downgrade to build 428 but using wmv worked so was as good workaround. The wmv encoder is actually pretty good in Vegas Pro, but I use handbrake and remux it afterwards into a Mac friendly mp4 to play locally. For full projects I will be exporting into Power Director and from there they have 5.1 from avc encoding plus Blu ray output.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #24 of 80 Old 02-08-2016, 06:31 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Well, I may have to upload in SBS after all. There is still an audio problem with my Vegas Pro so I have to output smaller segments to Power Director and PD doesn't have a TB output option. I might switch to Edius this year and just give up on VP. I was able to output to PD with AVC for video and use the 5.1 from wmv output. Really disappointed with Sony's software, will not buy any more from them.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #25 of 80 Old 08-27-2016, 07:31 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
IMPORTANT! Please Read:

3D is now broken on Youtube.

Bringing this topic back up with the changes to Chrome browsers (and I think Firefox and I.E.), wide support to current 3D videos on YT is dwindling.

I am at a loss on how to proceed on YT uploading for 3D. Before, I had stated that top/bottom is the best method for uploading 3D content because it's higher resolution on a passive screen, that would seem to level the quality among active and passive since a top/bottom would be the same resolution on both, however for all the reasons Don stated in previous post that point seems to be mute. People really don't care about quality, rather than what they're searching for and content and accessibility.

Flash player and flash video was the only way to toggle between different view modes like 2D, anaglyph, row interleaved and side by side. But now that Chrome has disabled Flash, there is only 2D and anaglyph modes to view, which leaves off interleaved and side by side because it rendered those video files to Flash which Chrome no longer supports. I've checked this on several videos, one that I uploaded as top/bottom HTML5 as well as older videos uploaded as 3D side by side (Flash). There doesn't seem to be a way to get to the Flash any more on Chrome what so ever. I have to use Safari (which is what I normally use, but I'm considering the broader picture for overall support).

Don't get me wrong, I'm an avid supporter of HTML5. I despise Flash, but it would seem premature to remove 3D support leaving current videos in place broken with no way to view in 3D.

At some point YT will likely phase out flash altogether? I'm surprised Apple hasn't phased Flash out yet on Safari, I still have access to it there, but it's likely coming, which means possibly sooner rather than later there will be no way to view content in side by side (for older Flash uploads), only anaglyph unless YT has plans to fix this that I haven't read about. Yes, yet another blow to 3D.

So poll questions:

what browser are you currently using to view 3D content in YT?
what viewing format are you using? anaglyph, side by side, etc.?
what format are you uploading 3D content in?
are you selecting video as a "3D video" when you upload?

The last question would currently be the only way to view side by side or top bottom on Chrome (and Firefox and IE, I think.) Just don't select 3D, but the Flash player had all methods available with one upload, now only anaglyph and 2D show up. I'm thinking about starting a new 3D channel just for 3D videos but I'm at a loss on how to proceed.

Forgot one other factor that benefits side by side and that's VR. Side by side will work with VR goggles but not top bottom, afaik. VR also has better support than 3D, it's supported on Chrome.

This line intentionally left blank.

Last edited by tomtastic; 08-27-2016 at 07:55 AM.
tomtastic is offline  
post #26 of 80 Old 08-27-2016, 01:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Tom, I had a lot of issues with uploading 3D SBS and T/B video, until I realized I had the 3D switch selected, then it would only show 2D. So I made sure that the files were uploaded as 2D, and the SBS and T/B videos worked fine as long as you have a 3D monitor that can switch to 3D for those formats. Of course, the video must be in full screen to work on the monitor. Otherwise Anaglyph has been the only option that still works and that seemed to work fine today. I'm using the Edge browser under Windows 10. This issue has been going on since the HTML5 player was used on YouTube.
3DBob is offline  
post #27 of 80 Old 08-27-2016, 04:06 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Yes, it goes back a few years now. Recently Chrome dropped support altogether for Flash so it's something I've been considering lately because viewership is going to take a hit, not that I have many videos or views yet personally. I've only posted a few videos last year and a half or so. But I'm working thru my content now so I'll have more to put up.

I've been doing the same thing too, just leaving as 2D and top/bottom format. But that means if you want 2D, you need a separate video for that and anaglyph is most likely the most used 3D format still since it doesn't require any hardware support. The Flash player, as much as I don't like Flash, it was the best way to upload 3D content as it gives the viewer the option to decide what format to view while only having to produce and upload one file. HTML5 I'm sure could have the same support but they haven't done much other than having it switch between 2D and anaglyph, no side by side or interleaved modes and I'm pretty certain the 2D version will only be half resolution then if it's using one eye view so quality takes a hit there.

Also, uploading as 2D to get side by side or top bottom means the video shows as 2D in the info. If you make a custom thumbnail they won't know by looking at it what format it is, 2D or what type of 3D it is. Maybe I could make a custom 3D log on the thumbnail to help. So that just leaves the title and description to label it as 3D and type.

But since I don't have many videos up yet, I was considering making a separate channel for just 3D, but trying to find the best method. I was ready to go back to uploading as side by side and checking 3D, but the number of people still with a browser that supports Flash is likely already not worth the effort to continue that. Accept it would still get you a video that support 2D (half resolution) and anaglyph plus legacy Flash supported browsers, however many there are left.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #28 of 80 Old 08-28-2016, 09:09 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 12,404
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1313 Post(s)
Liked: 373
The problem surfaces on computers, not the app driven TV's I have here. When I use my 3D supported players in the Home theater, my YT content simply displays automatically like any other 3D content on disk. I have been rendering all my 4D as SBS half in wmv. Then I tell YT it is a 3D program with SBS. I don't know the mechanism but when I watch on my computer screen it is anaglyph, When I watch on one of several IPTV devices that supports 3D the program is like any frame packed 3D Blu ray content. The new HTML5 seems to allow the projector to auto switch to 3D now. Currently I have been using my Samsung UHD K8500 player for 3D on YT. Even Barry's content auto switches to 3D and no need to see SBS and then have to put the projector in 3D SBS mode manually. Several months ago I was at a relative's house and they have an old Vizio and it displayed the new YT automatically as well.

My 3D videos and more
Don Landis HT System: Projector Sony VPL VW665ES Players: Samsung UBD K8500 OPPO BD93 Sony BDP S6200 All Regions Player Denon AVR 4311ci, 7.1 JBL Professional series and Klipsch PS3, XBOX360, Dish VIP722K; 3D Edit Suite: Edius7.53, Vegas Pro v13, Power Director15, i7-950, LG 3D TV DM2752
Don Landis is online now  
post #29 of 80 Old 08-28-2016, 10:52 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tomtastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 2,228
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post
my 4D as SBS half in wmv
Really? So does that include chair vibrations, puffs of air and smell? lol!

I could never get the apps to work on my BD player or TV very well. To search content took forever to type in with remote and navigation with remote was awful. Much better from computer source but maybe they've improved it by now, my player and TV are from 2012. I always have to manually switch the 3D format, only have auto with frame packing signals, oh well.

So that's good news though that those hardware apps don't have any issues, so side by side isn't lost, it's just an issue now on Chrome and some other browsers. I think I may upload as side by side and select 3D, then maybe upload as a top/bottom, seems redundant but I'm not sure if this is something that will be fixed soon or down the road or ever. They need to get it so you only have to upload once like before, right now I would say most who surf YT are on a computer, which is why anaglyph is still the most popular mode.

This line intentionally left blank.
tomtastic is offline  
post #30 of 80 Old 08-29-2016, 08:44 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 12,404
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1313 Post(s)
Liked: 373
4D typo.

The apps are still awkward for searching specific content. I use the search tool often and the latest ones seem to remember "my list" with just a few letters. On YT I can type Don and my name comes up and my YT channel is there. If I want to see other 3D stuff, I just type 3D and I get lots to choose from. Tarn and Barry's channel comes up because one time I typed in his full name. Several of my player aps work that way and then my new 3D projector just switches automatically to 3D. I never see that split screen of SBS anymore on YT. So they must have figured out how to send a meta data trigger that modern 3D projectors can recognize. Pretty cool!

Yes it is an issue with computer browsers. Next time I fire up my other computer with the 3D graphics card connected to my 3D passive monitor, I'll see what options I have and let you know.

I'm leaving for a trip soon so not sure I'll get to it until I get back.

My 3D videos and more
Don Landis HT System: Projector Sony VPL VW665ES Players: Samsung UBD K8500 OPPO BD93 Sony BDP S6200 All Regions Player Denon AVR 4311ci, 7.1 JBL Professional series and Klipsch PS3, XBOX360, Dish VIP722K; 3D Edit Suite: Edius7.53, Vegas Pro v13, Power Director15, i7-950, LG 3D TV DM2752
Don Landis is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 3D Source Components

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off