Skip to main content
dmiraie
dmiraie
Inspiring
January 12, 2017
Answered

"Use Maximum Render Quality" for Youtube ..?

  • January 12, 2017
  • 1 reply
  • 32009 views

Should my Youtube-destined Premiere exports "use maximum render quality"?  Thnx!

    This topic has been closed for replies.
    Correct answer excited_Genie16B8

    If you have CUDA turned on, then no.

    If you have CUDA turned off but aren't scaling any media, then still no.

    1 reply

    E
    excited_Genie16B8Correct answer
    Legend
    January 12, 2017

    If you have CUDA turned on, then no.

    If you have CUDA turned off but aren't scaling any media, then still no.

      A
      Ashley7
      Legend
      July 25, 2017

      Jim_Simon  wrote

      If you have CUDA turned on, then no.

      If you have CUDA turned off but aren't scaling any media, then still no.

      Hi Jim, Jim Simon​ ... I've been reading up on the render quality options... came across your answer here, as well as an answer from 2010 in the following post... Re: "Maximum Render Quality" Better to turn it OFF when using CUDA MPE?

      That other post is old I'm not sure how applicable it is these days which might clarify your answer to this thread...

      In that older thread, it seems that in some cases maximum render quality (MRQ) can benefit some render operations which still use the CPU despite the GPU being present. Does this no longer apply given advances in tech since that old 2010 post?

      I ask because your answer seems to imply that in the presence of CUDA there is no need to check the MRQ box where as that old post seems to imply there are cases for checking MRQ despite a GPU being present... cases which Adobe was apparently interested in diminishing over time. Perhaps they've been diminished to the point where the exceptions to the rule no longer apply.

      A general layperson's test that old thread suggests one can take is to render a complex portion of a timeline twice, once with/without MRQ... if the MRQ render yields a longer encode time with a GPU present, that old thread indicates the longer time means the CPU is being used because MRQ is checked... which therefore supposedly indicates additional work of value is being done in the CPU despite the GPU's presence.

      I'm guessing that way of seeing things may no longer apply or that you know MRQ has specifically no benefit for YouTube as a destination. Just curious which...  Thanks!

      R Neil Haugen
      R Neil Haugen
      Legend
      July 27, 2017

      https://forums.adobe.com/people/R+Neil+Haugen  wrote

      ... when you try to export, it takes an hour of render-exporting time for every thirty seconds of sequence? Well ... maybe there's a different way to do this!...

      Neil

      LoL ... 1 hour per 30 seconds... okay, I agree there...

      ...nothing was blowing up or anything in my case... was just curious what the current perspective is on those options... it's immensely helpful to hear an experienced person such as yourself share the gist of how you see things. For myself personally hearing that sort of info never removes the need to test something out.

      There are so many cases to test... I'm not an encoding expert but I read somewhere that 2pass can effect file size which can effect streaming and quality of lower bandwidth situations... that info was from some time ago... but if I do a test on my desktop, or don't have every device in the world... I have to stop testing at some boundary. I just think hearing experienced input on options like that can help make testing smarter so to speak... that says nothing of just hearing what someone's general experience is.

      Also, I just noticed something... I was using AME to encode and was searching its docs and came up empty beyond a general unhelpful blurb (see below)... just now I ran across the Premiere Sequence settings docs for the same options... seems to offer a better elaboration... wondering if maybe the AME docs could ref those or something. If you see the difference below, you'll see why, after seeing the AME docs, I searched around here, saw that old clarifying thread from 5 years ago felt like asking about current wisdom... but I had not yet seen the Premiere seq docs (below)...

      From the Encode and export video and audio with Media Encoder​ docs, I only found this...

      ...

      (Optional) Select Use Maximum Render Quality or Render At Maximum Bit Depth.

      Note:  Rendering at a higher color bit depth requires more RAM and slows rendering substantially.

      ...

      From the Create and change sequences in Premiere Pro​ docs which I just found, there's a more robust overview...

      Maximum Bit Depth

      Maximizes the color bit depth, up to 32 bpc, to include in video played back in sequences. This setting is often not available if the selected compressor provides only one option for bit depth. You can also specify an 8-bit (256-color) palette when preparing a sequence for 8-bpc color playback, such as when using the Desktop editing mode for the web or for some presentation software. If your project contains high-bit-depth assets generated by programs such as Adobe Photoshop, or by high-definition camcorders, select Maximum Bit Depth. Premiere Pro then uses of all the color information in those assets when processing effects or generating preview files.

      Maximum Render Quality

      Maintains sharp detail when scaling from large formats to smaller formats, or from high-definition to standard-definition formats. Maximum Render Quality maximizes the quality of motion in rendered clips and sequences. Selecting this option often renders moving assets more sharply.

      At maximum quality, rendering takes more time, and uses more RAM than at the default normal quality. Select this option only on systems with sufficient RAM. The Maximum Render Quality option is not recommended for systems with the minimum required RAM.

      Maximum Render Quality often makes highly compressed image formats, or those containing compression artifacts, look worse because of sharpening.

      Note:

      For best results with Maximum Render Quality, select Memory from the Optimize Rendering For menu in preferences. For more information, see Optimize rendering for available memory.

      ... but I totally get one needs to prepare and test... I don't seek clarification to just get the answer I need to use but just fill things out... it can help test more smartly at the very least.

      Anyway, thanks for the wisdom once again!


      That bit you quoted about MRQ ... that often with highly-compressed media it makes things worse? Yup.

      The majority of my media starts from either the GH3, which I've typically shot in "standard" mp4 or mov (both highly-compressed long-GOP) as the stuff has more noise when using the All-Intra camera setting; and these days, for some of my projects, from my Samsung S7 ... ​phone!​ You know ​that's​ highly-compressed ​long​-GOP.

      For much of the 'standard' mov/mp4 from the GH3, if the project needed best quality, I've used either MediaEncoder to watch-folder create transcodes, or Prelude to transcode editing media, typically in Cineform, although occasionally DNxHD/R. The phone media, I always convert to CFR via Handbrake, and for some projects, have then taken that 4k/8-bit media and within ME have made 1080 4:2:2 10-bit ... which surprised me as to how far I can push that media then in Lumetri or Resolve without inducing artifacts.

      For the 1080 projects I've worked with straight-from-the cam media from the GH3, MRQ and MBD do not seem to help, but MRQ often induces artifacts, especially edge jaggies and halos.

      Working with 4:2:2 media in a good intraframe codec (Cineform, DNxHD/R, mid-upper ProRes ... ) the two options don't seem to hurt, can add to render time somewhat (though not always) depending on the machine involved and I suppose effects used and such options ... and for some clips and or effects, may help some. I know some editors just use them period. I've talked with quite a few about this at NAB, and for those that use them, others just shake their heads and say they can't see enough difference when they do work to be worth the time, and often ... they can cause a problem. So they just leave them off.

      Red Giant's video de-noising plugin is doing such an improved job over a version or two back, that I'm starting to shoot more of the All-Intra from the GH3, and just allowing time for de-noising that media. But still, haven't noted that in the 8-bit it produces any advantage to either MBD or MRQ. I haven't tested it for projects needing to go down to 1280x720 or SD yet, though. Especially going to SD for DVD purposes, it ​might​ make some difference. I think I can get away with just BluRay finally, however ... so ... well, I'll still test it. Moving diagonal sharply focused lines are marvy for testing this.

      Neil

      Everyone's mileage always varies ...
        Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
        Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices