rendered video quality worst than video in project

[mla]

For last years I am using Samsung Galaxy Note 9 as a camera for vids.
Use 1920x1080 default frame rate settings (that usually comes to 30)
Usually very good quality of original and the same after edititng and rendering.
Last saturday had 1.5hours vid in darker hall with flashing lights.
During editing Reaper video screen on 32" monitor showed very good result.
After editing and rendering the quality was lost. Very noticeable on 32" screen. rendered with the same 1920x1080 and 30. But found that initial file had just 23 fps (usually 30).
And not so good on 55 inch TV. Usually superb quality.

I think may be it because that video was in a darker hall than usually?
The question is it normal that rendered quality is poorer than in Reaper video screen. Talking about the same 32" full screen. May be possible to do something? Doubt...

[papagirafe]

Originally Posted by mla

For last years I am using Samsung Galaxy Note 9 as a camera for vids.
Use 1920x1080 default frame rate settings (that usually comes to 30)
Usually very good quality of original and the same after edititng and rendering.
Last saturday had 1.5hours vid in darker hall with flashing lights.
During editing Reaper video screen on 32" monitor showed very good result.
After editing and rendering the quality was lost. Very noticeable on 32" screen. rendered with the same 1920x1080 and 30. But found that initial file had just 23 fps (usually 30).
And not so good on 55 inch TV. Usually superb quality.

I think may be it because that video was in a darker hall than usually?
The question is it normal that rendered quality is poorer than in Reaper video screen. Talking about the same 32" full screen. May be possible to do something? Doubt...

Rendered quality directly depends to which encoder you chose and the bitrate. VMA in Reaper is not good for fast transitions like flashing lights in the dark; FFMPEG is much better.

[mla]

always using ffmpeg... and get very good quality.
Probably the environment is the cause...

But still cannot understand why Reaper video screen image is better than rendered one

[papagirafe]

Originally Posted by mla

always using ffmpeg... and get very good quality.
Probably the environment is the cause...

But still cannot understand why Reaper video screen image is better than rendered one

I would suggest you to post a screen shot of your rendering parameters otherwise we are all in the dark.

[mla]

1. my default settings for rendering

2. screenshot from Reaper Video window

for having an idea of the environment. Light is flashing.
As I mentioned in Video window the video is noticeably sharper on 32" monitor, than rendered clip.
And it's first time that I see it. Usually very very good videos with the rendering settings mentioned.
Probably dark flashing is the cause.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...ZK?usp=sharing

[papagirafe]

The video "kpbs" is set way too low for Full HD! I use a minimum of 4096 but try 8192 first. If the file is too big, you can revert always to 4096 but instead I would reencode with a tool called Handbrake that compresses very efficiently while keeping a good quality.

[EpicSounds]

reaper's default bitrate strikes again!
I go 8000 to 12000 for 1080p. Bigger number means bigger file and less data/detail/quality lost.

[mla]

The original recording is on 1920x1080 that is why my logic says that it not make sense to use higher resolution for rendering.

Am I right thinking this way?

Don't use Handbrake for at least 2 years. Love Reaper's file size.

May be I messing around with this but I compared video quality from another similar event - not so bright light too but no flashing at all.
And it seems to be about the same. Sure that any video in brigh light is very good quality on large screen. I always liked the result but this last one really caught my eye on poorer quality.

If you want check 3 vids

1. Last one that I complaining about (on 32" or 55")

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNujj6UxQso&t=88s

2. Similar event that I don't complain.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFQ8d4Otvzw

3. Bright light

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bawdxhE8bek

Bsically, static items are pretty sharp, moving people not so. That is normal probably in darker light environment. Again #1 that I complaining really caught my eye... so I "panicked"

Please answer my question in upper part of the message.

Thank you.

[mla]

after posting 3 links I decided to check all of them again on 32" and 55".
My bad...all 3 basically are not good on 55".

#3 (with bright light) is very good on 32" but practically bad on 55"

So all comes to not enough resolution for my files.
I don't go higher because the file will become too "heavy".

Sorry, seems like bothered for nothing...

[papagirafe]

Originally Posted by mla

after posting 3 links I decided to check all of them again on 32" and 55".
My bad...all 3 basically are not good on 55".

#3 (with bright light) is very good on 32" but practically bad on 55"

So all comes to not enough resolution for my files.
I don't go higher because the file will become too "heavy".

Sorry, seems like bothered for nothing...

Resolution is not that much of an issue as encoding is. If one would save each frame individually as full quality pictures, the result would be a humongous file. Encoders use all kind of strategies to reduce that file size and the bitrate determines how much sacrifices in quality they need to do. Increasing the bitrate recommended by EpicSound will lead to much better results. BTW the TV itself may be degrading the quality : a lot of consumer products have poor hardware decoders.

[mla]

Originally Posted by papagirafe

Resolution is not that much of an issue as encoding is. If one would save each frame individually as full quality pictures, the result would be a humongous file. Encoders use all kind of strategies to reduce that file size and the bitrate determines how much sacrifices in quality they need to do. Increasing the bitrate recommended by EpicSound will lead to much better results. BTW the TV itself may be degrading the quality : a lot of consumer products have poor hardware decoders.

Thank you!

If you can answer pls this question:

The original recording is on 1920x1080 that is why my logic says that it not make sense to use higher resolution for rendering.

Am I right thinking this way?

[papagirafe]

bitrate is not resolution. These are 2 different concepts. Resolution is the number of pixels in x/y directions. Bitrate is how much ressources you allocate over time to the encoder to describe the colors of your pixels. The default bitrate is like asking 2 nurses to run a whole hostipal! it's just not enough.

[mla]

Great bitrate explanation ...
Thank you!
In OpenCamera app frame rate stays on default and usually outcome video shows 30 frame/seconds. Last video came to 23.
I will try to set 30 fix and will try 60 too to compare the results.

Am I right thinking that when rendering resolution and frame rate should be set to same numbers as a source video and not higher.

[BPBaker]

Originally Posted by EpicSounds

reaper's default bitrate strikes again!
I go 8000 to 12000 for 1080p. Bigger number means bigger file and less data/detail/quality lost.

Does anyone happen to know if there's a way to change this default bitrate and make it "stick?" It seems to reset each time you change the output format...

[EpicSounds]

i don't think so. I just set up a few presets once and only use those