MTS to mp4 using the quick menu.

[patrickv63917272]

Dear,

Editing MTS camcorder video files (1920x1080). Is there a big difference of quality between the export options:

A/ exporting quickly (the first option, in dutch it is called 'snel exporteren') 

1280x720

6074 kbps, 

30 frames/sec

B/ adapting (apparaten aangepast) the export myself to 

 1920 x 1080

14.945 kbps

25 frames /sec 

Logically I would go for B/ as it is equal to the original.

This option gives bigger files, what I understand.

But why isn't this one of the main options?

And what is the damage when exporting to A: with smaller frame definition, more frames/sec (!?!) and a much lower bitrate.

Both have the MP4 extension.

Secondly: it is only possible to export to Avi in 720x576. format. Why? I do not understand. 

Thanks and kind regards,

Patrick

[Ann Bens]

First of all dont mix framerates.

Filesize = bitrate x duration

If your original files are 30 fps and your project is too you wont get 25 frames in the export. You need to go into the advanced setting.

But do not export 30 fps to 25.  Wont look good.

Set your camera to 25 fps.

Avi as in dv avi is Standard Sefinition which is 720x576. There is no other format.

[patrickv63917272]

Thank you.  During many years AVI as the best format to export to. When you film in .mts and export to AVI, the quality will be excellent (lossless?) but only in a lower frame size,  am I right? But I presume it is ridiculous to export to an Avi-format unless if my recordings are from a time that 720x576 was the only format. I am a bit away from my original subject now: I archievd digitaly a lot of video's I made in the late 70's.  The format that I digitalised it to was a little bit guess-work as I did not know:  From an analogue SVHS to a digital file = which format to choose? I Understand that the frame rate ha-s to be thesame, no?

[Ann Bens]

If you want to archive old VHS, mp4 would be the way to go now.

No point in exporting to dv avi as you cannot play it anywhere but on a computer.

[patrickv63917272]

If I understand that th ebest choice to loose as less as possible from the original is to export to 1920x1080 

BUT  H.264 or H.264 AVCHD  ?

[Bill Sprague]

If my experience with a 12 year old Panasonic AVCHD camcorder is correct, the AVCHD implys Dolby five channel audio.  You may want to stay with the more generic H.264 for more compatibilty.   Try it both ways and see what you think.  The latest versions of Premiere Elements do not support Dolby audio well!

[Steve Grisetti]

Simply put, 1280x720 is not full HD. It has less than half the resolution of 1920x1080 -- which is why it is a smaller file. Lower resolution means less clarity -- especially if you watch it full screen on a computer or HDTV. So if by quality, you mean how sharp the picture is, there is a lot of difference.

If your original footage is 1920x1080 and your project settings are 1920x1080, you'd be best to output 1920x1080 if you're showing your video online or on a computer or TV.

You don't say what operating system you're using, but you should be able to output 720x576 in any of several formats, including MP4. If you don't see several options, I'm not sure why.

[Ann Bens]

I disagree on several points.

Resolution has no bearing on the filesize.

Filesize is determined by bitrate x duration and not the hight and width.

Lower the bitrate and image quality drops.

Its not advisable to output 720x576 in any other format then dv avi.

[patrickv63917272]

"If your original footage is 1920x1080 and your project settings are 1920x1080, you'd be best to output 1920x1080 if you're showing your video online or on a computer or TV."

Thank you.  I must have hoped that an 1920x1080 recording could be exported to a lighter video format without loosing  image quality (clarity, sharpness, ...) due to better compression methods etc.  

So the only best format to export to departing from MTS is the  1920x1080, I start to understand? 

[Steve Grisetti]

Maybe we're not understanding what you're asking.

Are you asking how to convert a video to a smaller file size at the same quality and resolution?

[patrickv63917272]

Dear Steve,

Thank you for the folow up. 

I uploaded a long text a hour ago, describing my concern.  I don't see it here?  Meanwhile, as an answer to your latest question: "does that exist a smaller file size at the same quality and resolution" ? If yes, I am very hungry to know, yes please. 🙂 

My general question is: videofiles from a Panasonic camcorder in MTS format, imported in Adobe Première Light: which format is the best to export to respect the maximum the original quality?  The last test that I did yesterday was exporting one sequence to: 1920x1080 in two verseions:

1/ H264  = a file with extension MP4 size 60 Mb +/- and a thumbnail with image of the video (Win explorer) 

2/ H264 AVCHD. = file extension M4V,  size 8 Mb and a neutral Icon and is unplayable 

I am sorry if it is still not understandable? To resume: which export format starting from MTS and saving the same quality as the original and yes, why not, if it is possible the exact same quality but more compact?

Many thanks,

Pat

[Steve Grisetti]

I'm not sure what Adobe Premiere Light is and what its capabilities are.

But if your original footage is 1920x1080 MTS and you import it into a 1920x1080 Premiere Elements project, your should export your final video as 1920x1080 MP4 to maintain its full quality as much as possible. It's not more complicated than that.

[Bill Sprague]

As I wrote above, I have a Panasonic Camcorder that records with MTS files extensions.  The key feature of that camcorder was that it could record in "full HD" using what Panasonic and Sony called "AVCHD".   AVCHD meant that the format included 5 channel Dolby audio tracks which (which has become mostly unused now).  The camerat has a button to cause recording at 1920x1080p60.  That means the footage was not "interlaced" and at 60 frames per second.    

I dug out a clip and looked at it with Mediainfo.  The frame rate is actually 59.94, not 60.

In my recent version of Premier Elements the quick button default "HD 1920x1080" choice is for H.264 at 30 frames per second.  You can improve on that.  Using the Export&Share > Devices > Custom > Advanced Settings.  Select H.264 and push the Match Source button.  It should select a frame rate of 59.94.    You should get the best quality available from your Panasonic MTS footage.  

There are other choices if your goal is small files.  All of those choices will reduce "picture quality" but may be suitable for sharing when viewing devices are small.  

[patrickv63917272]

Oh thank you.  That is what I startedt to realize after your and other reactions here.

It is Premiere Elements, sorry.

I was only hoping at a certain moment,a time ago, that there should exist a way to save in a smaller size and still have the (nearly) same quality.  In fact it is very confusing because the app makes a few propositions (I have it in dutch and I'll translate):   the option for TV for example: in the commentary it is said that this is good to exchange high quality Video.  O, Nice. But the frae tae they propose here is 29,97 Fps.  It is misleading as long you do not understand that you have to go via nother menu to adapt the Fps for example.  Even the very first option 

 

And if you choose to upload to Vimeo for example it proposes 1280x7200 (but it is titled as HD) and also 29,97 fps. The footage is shot at 25fps. So I imagine it is not the most sane situation to upgrade the Fps from 25 tot 29,7... ?  i allready uploaded to Vimeo in the fullest quality and best parameters in H246 and they automatically recompress. So, their recompressed material will be good enough for the online viewing but not enough to be projected  on a big screen big format for an audience of 400 people for example, I presume? Or are they capable to compress the video in a way that nobody sees the difference?      

[patrickv63917272]

Forgive my typing and ortographical errors, I am too much in a hurry and this subject makes me somewhat nervous as it becomes too complex sometimes and would prefer to spend my time for the editing. 🙂

[Ann Bens]

If your export is 29.97 fps your project is too. Guessing you started off with the incorrect framerate.

If you want the best result project settings should match framerate: 25 fps.

Here is how: Changing Project Settings in Premiere Elements - YouTube 

Projection on a big screen (large audience) is also depended on the projection equipment.

Bitrate should not exceed 30 Mbps as not all equipment can handle high bitrate.

For projection for large audience, I usually set it to about 15 mbps.

What ever export settings you choose, there will always be compression and image quality loss.

[patrickv63917272]

Merci. Thank you!

But still my question stays: is there a way to make the exported file smaller in size and still excellent to project  for example (assuming the projector is excellent too)?

[Ann Bens]

I dont understand why you want the filesize reduced?

As I said before: filesize = bitrate x duration.

The only way to get the filesize down and keep image quality is to use the H.265 (HEVC) codec.

But not all equipment will play H.265

This projection is it private or some sort of festival.

If you use H.264 and you lower the bitrate, so will the image quality. Cannot have it all.

[patrickv63917272]

@ann: reduce the size just to keep space left on my disks.

There is no projection planned actually. I took this s an example of a situation where a badder image quality could be seen, in the contrary of the same video on a small laptop.

Thank you and all the others here very much. It may sound strange but making the puzzle with the different answers I understand much much more now altough there will remain dark corners here and there.

Have a nice week-end!

Pat

[Ann Bens]

Different situations require different export settings.

[patrickv63917272]

Yes, thank you. I bei to live with that terrible reality. 😉

I have read today in a comparaison MP4 versus AVCHD that AVCHD has the best quality of image and sound and therefore is used by professionals to store their original productions with. This sounds logic tot me. But at many points MP4 seems the best choice even is the image and sound quality seems a little bit less good. But how much differs the quality of an MP4 (at the same configuation as the footage)?  If we would express it in percents: is that kind of 99 percent? 90? ...80 percent?  Difficult to put it in such comparaison I imagine...

[Bill Sprague]

You are asking questions that can't be answered in the way you want.   Percentage of quality doesn't work.  In the end, you have to use your own viewing to determine if the quality is what you want.  

I think you may be reading the wrong stuff!  AVCHD is not the universal choice of professionals.   It may have been true when Blu-Ray discs were dominant.   

You may need to read more about what MP4 is.  It is only a file format that is a "container" of many parts.  One of those parts is the actual codec.  Other parts are for how the codec was used.   Nor can you compare MP4 to other containers.   

[patrickv63917272]

Thank you. It stays a confusing world to me: at one side it is made of scientific exact factors (bits and bytes and rates and algorithms etc etc.) and at the other side  "you have to use your own viewing to determine if the quality is what you want". I aspire to work and/or keep my original audio-visual material in the best quality. No more no less. If that is possble in MP4 I'll be glad with it. But it is still confusing: some people were so kind to post info like:

"if your original footage is 1920x1080 MTS and you import it into a 1920x1080 Premiere Elements project, your should export your final video as 1920x1080 MP4 to maintain its full quality as much as possible."    (as much as possibe??)

Or: What ever export settings you choose, there will always be compression and image quality loss.  

Now do I understand that the output of videomaterial after editing can never be 100% exactly the same quality?  When editing on tapes in the past (open reel, SVHS, UMatic, Betcam,etc. - I am 63 😉  there was also some quality loss when editing to another tape.  Now it is +/- the same effect only even more complicated as you have to finetune infinitely the configuration when at the export.  Maybe consumers might come back to buy videocams if all this story should become more simple.  The proof is the tons of questions on the Internet and the tons of efforts that are done to explain about formats and co.  

After all it should all work like a car: turn the key, start to ride and arrive at your destination (making a story, a documentary, or any) without necessarily knowing about the engine. Of course it can be interesting to know about the inside of the motor. But it is not an absolute must, my opinion. 

Anyway, many thanks again to you and everybody here for your helpfulness. I am not going to ask your further atention unless maybe be later for some obscure details in the configuration...

Nice week-end to all of you,

Patrick (Antwerp, Belgium)

[Bill Sprague]

"I aspire to work and/or keep my original audio-visual material in the best quality. No more no less."

The essential concept of video editing is to improve the look of the clips.  You trim them, adjust the color, add music and more all to improve the "story".   Therefor the original clips must be "coded" at creation and then "decoded" with a video player.  Hence the term "codec" for code and decode.  There are many codecs but, one of the most common is called "H.264".   It is so good that if you use it to make a direct copy the viewing of the original and the output will not show a difference to the viewer.   In theory, if you do that enough times in sequence to the same clip, the eye will begin to see differences.   

If the only thing you want to do is trim, and maybe join, clips with no adjustments or enhancements, you might be looking for a video editor that does what is called "smart rendering".  Instead of the coding, decoding, rendering process it (in theory) makes direct copies of each frame from the source to the output.  

If you google for "smart rendering video editing software" you will find some interesting reading.   Because it is such a narrow niche there are few products that do it.  The one that comes up most often is called "TMPGEnc MPEG Smart Renderer".  I have no experience with it so can't I recommend it.  

The simple method of retaining original quality that most seem to use is to make both backups and working copies of our originals.  I think most editors only use copies of their out of camera clips. 

[patrickv63917272]

Dear Bill,

Many thanks for the extra info! I feel more comfortable now wit the H.264" and I'll explore the "mart rendering video editing software".

Kind regards,

Patrick