NVIDIA Shadowplay's Best Setting for YouTube?

Good day, friends. I hope this is the right section to post my questions. After all, Shadowplay and by extension GeForce Experience are closely affiliated with Forceware.

As much as I'm not making it big, it's my hobby to upload my finer gameplay onto the web, YouTube to be precise. For that purpose, I even bought FRAPS a year ago.

Upon release, Shadowplay proved way superior to FRAPS, but I'm in confusion how to strike a balance between quality and speed for YouTube uploads. It'll be great if some gurus share their settings here.

1. Shadow Time Duration?
2. 30 fps/ 60 fps?
3. Birate?

Some people may prefer to "unleash" Shadowplay to the fullest and choose 20 minutes Shadow Time with the High Quality Preset (60 fps & 50 Mbps). It's a great idea for observing one's gameplay for improvement, but definitely an overkill for casual YouTube montages.:stewpid:

It's not about disk space. It's about the tedious loading time to edit the clip with Movie Maker. It's about YouTube compression, which massively clips quality.c1:

P.S.

Just found a nice article explaining the ins and outs of YouTube upload.

http://www.videomaker.com/article/17034-encoding-youtube-videos-at-the-highest-quality

 

I don't think that guy knows wtf he's talking about?

For sure, shadowplay makes really great videos, but getting them looking good on youtube is really difficult. As best as I can describe it, we get crap quality looking videos because of shadowplay's audio. YT includes the audio in calculating overall bitrate and we need to wait for more/better options from SP.

I can actually record with dxtory using h.264 in 720p and have the final product look better on youtube than a shadowplay shadow clip untouched.

In short, everything that guy said about youtube letting you upload whatever bitrate you can is wrong. YT limits your bitrate.

I'm currently messing around with this. I found Vegas doesn't really play well with SP. Hopefully Premier will be better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ulgYn7DaxA#t=759

 

YT re-encodes everything you upload there. You can upload pretty much everything there.


----
Biggest problem with SP is the audio quality. It's low bitrate and sounds worse than what you would expect from AAC at that bitrate. Also SP just doesn't produce that good video. Quality is really bad considering the video bitrate, it will look (and sound) quite bad in YT once it gets re-encoded.

 

I noticed. Visual artifacts are very noticeable.

But guys. Until SP improves, should I use low video bit-rate (10 Mbps) recording, knowing quality always drops bad on YouTube? To save time? :infinity:

 

It depend on people that upload, did he want a higher or lower quality for viewer.
You can try trick YouTube to having less artifacts by convert to the H.264 format that YouTube love.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsE5V9xlcZs

That's recorded with SP at the very lowest quality possible, at 30 fps, but at 1080p. For YouTube, I think it's more than enough and the filesize is much smaller and faster to upload.

 

I don't see a reason not to set settings to highest, since the resulting files are still laughably small compared to lossless like Fraps. I wouldn't compromise quality to get a 3 gig file instead of 3.5 gig, but I guess it depends on what you want from the video and how you plan on using it.

 

I use Windows Movie Maker's "Upload to YouTube" function.

The output file is MP4.

 

FRAPS has perfect video quality but the AVI file size is monstrous.

On the other hand, I will be giving 10 Mbps a shot @ 30fps ST: 5 Min. The resulting file is only 375MB.

 

Well as I said, depends on the task. I'm trying to get best quality to YouTube with my uploads, but before uploading I'm also editing the clips in Vegas, and then compressing the footage myself using meGUI into x264. If I use raw shadowplay files, they are already compressed and I double compress them resulting into rather so-so quality, while using Fraps allows raw lossless footage to be edited and compressed later. Takes time, but with a separate 1tb HDD just for the footage, the size is not really a problem since I delete it right once I'm done with it.

 

Maybe you can try to find out from this guy http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/886068-Advanced-Encoding-Watch-Dogs-Graphics-Showcase-You-won-t-believe-this-is-YouTube-Forums The quality of his video, even though its youtube, is great.

 

Hmm, not sure about this...

Anyways, here is the setting you can set, but I don't tested it yet as I has a normal ADSL upload speed.
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1722171?hl=en

 

Thanks. I know this already.

 

He only teases his "advanced" H.264 encoding. Nothing worthwhile so far.:wanker:

 

Makes sense.

Shadow Mode of Shadow Play is my primary tool, however. It's too hardcore to record with FRAPS for prolonged sessions.:banana:

 

I guess I didn't word it right. Yes, you can upload anything you want; however, it's pointless. You may as well have not bothered because after YT gets its hands on it, it's going to cut the bitrate down to 6k for 1080 and 3k for 720 vods.

In effect, you can't just upload whatever because that's not what anyone's going to see.

SP audio bitrate is 101kbps. Sure, could be better, but it's not bad before youtube gets it. We just need a way to figure out how to keep audio high and maintain some sort of visual quality?

Like I said, my 720 vods at ~ 3kbps look better than stock sp vods at 5k. Can't explain it.

 

It is easy to explain. The hardware encoder in keplers are not that good. It is speed over quality. Also the audio is not on par with best AAC encoders at the same bitrate (any lossy audio codec at 100kbps sounds pretty bad artifacts are pretty easy to hear).

 

If you want quality, two things to say:

1) Don't use Shadowplay
2) Don't use YouTube

Until SP and YT change to H265 4:4:4, no matter what you do, you are gonna lose the top and bottom end of the 0-255 on red, green and blue.

In terms of datarate, yeah SP is great for filesize, but the quality (if that's what we are talking about here) is terrible but not versus the filesize.

YT used to provide higher bitrate compression for resolutions above 1200P - but this was stopped, so there is no benefit visually in choosing a resolution above 1200P any longer.

IF you are truly and genuinely concerned about quality on YouTube, then use FRAPS lossless 4:4:4 (absolute highest possible quality available, no argument) and upload the raw file to YouTube.

Please bear in mind that even if you did this, then YouTube will cut off the bottom and top end of the RGB, so you would totally lose quality.

To get an idea as to what I'm talking about, take a blue ray off your shelf, pop it into your computer and using the scene selection, find a frame used in the trailer which has been uploaded by Warner Brothers OFFICIAL channel (or whomever) and compare the frames.

As Warner Brothers ét all upload RAW files to YouTube, you will see just how poor the compression is on YT.

If you want people to watch you playing the game, then edit to a decent 60FPS MP4 with a megahigh bitrate and upload that to a fileshare site like mediafire or whatever and get people to download it and watch it.

If you want quality, that's the best thing to do. This is not opinion, conjecture or belief; this is fact.

 

Or I will said that, until YouTube don't re-transcoding the video like some of the Video Website at China do, then we will always get a bad quality on video.

 

SP clips on the local machine are actually quite nice. The clips themselves, per se, are not the problem. Yeah, sure, they're not quite as good as Dxtory/Lagarith Lossless, or Fraps, but they're a lot nicer than anything that can be seen on YT.

The problem, in terms of this thread, isn't how good or bad the clips are; the problem is figuring out how to get something that approaches quality on YT. I haven't figured out how to do that yet? As I said, I have 720p videos made with dxtory/h.264vfw that look much better than any SP clip I've ever tried to upload, even though when viewing them on the local machine, the SP clips blow the h.264 clips away.

My only real point in this thread was that the author said that if you want better quality videos on YT, then all you had to do was upload higher quality clips, and that's just not true because of YT's shenanigans.