2

I have a Sony Bloggie camera that produces MP4 files. I want to edit them and upload them as fast as possible to youtube, in the best quality available.

Currently i'm using Kdenlive, that gives me a relative good output in .mpeg in HD 1280X720, but the rendering takes sometimes 4-5 hours for a 15 min clip edited project.

Is there a better way? BTW, i'm on 10.04 on a dell Studio 1557.

1
  • Did you try Kino? I find it very handy but I have no experience with hd videos (I have poor hardware) :)
    – Pitto
    Apr 15, 2011 at 15:39

2 Answers 2

3

mp4's can be easily edited using both kdenlive and openshot.

If you use kdenlive you may be in the need to have KDE's theme properly configured in order to avoid problems with the menus and other program's items while at work.

I personally prefer the usage of kdenlive.

Transcoding can also be done inside of both these NLES. Or by following one of this suggestions: How can I maximum compress video files?

Screenshots placed here for your convenience.

kdenlive

enter image description here

openshot

enter image description here

The properties of the mp4 file that I used for this screenshots:

enter image description here

Good luck!

1

It can be a bit of a tradeoff between where you want to save time. Kdenlive is a perfectly respectable editor, if you were looking to try out alternatives then you could also try cinelerra or PiTiVi. Kino is useful for simple edits but can quickly get out of its depth.

The problem is that mp4 is a compressed format (hence it fits on the camera smart card), but that makes it harder to edit because your editing program has to do the work of decoding it. What you can do is convert your video file to a raw format like a .dv file or a DV encoded .avi which will make the rendering and editing much faster. The downsides however are that:

  1. raw video takes up huge amounts of space, expect an hour of SD video to be over 10GB, I don't know how big it will be for HD but its going to be bigger, and some programs don't like editing files that large.
  2. you have to spend the extra time before and after editing, encoding the files. i.e. turning them from mp4 to raw, editing and then back from raw to mp4.

My main advice would be to try the approach above and play around with other formats, but I don't know how much time you'll actually save. While a 4-5 hour render is quite a while, once you take into account the time to encode at each and the huge increase in disk space needed to work with the files you might decide its not worth it.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .