@Purbear

Hi,

Did you check Tiktok and Instagram video formats? All I can find is max. 1920x1080 or 1080x1920.

What makes you think otherwise?

The fact that Movie Studio can actually import and export 8K is amazing. That it can't export 8K in 9:16 is good.

That a portrait mode video format exists, is ridiculous, IMHO. I cringe when I see people taking video in portrait mode. These are the same people who wonder why there are black bars on either side of the video when viewed on their TV...and then complain about it.

Of course it's going to slow down when exporting to 8K - it's 8K, huge!

@AAProds

Hi Al,

I can export to 4K 9:16 in MS2023. Set the project settings to 2160x3840 9:16. When I go to export, the same settings appear. I showed this in another thread.

John CB

@browj2 @Purbear

Thanks John, I can't get to my 2023 computer because I can't start it after I put in a new graphics card. NHJ. Magix has obviously upped the allowable portrait export sizes = good.

Don't be so harsh on Portrait videos; I quite often trim my 16:9s down to 1:1 for Whatsapp and I can see applications for portrait shots. It is slightly annoying to have to turn your phone on it's side to get the subject in the video big enough when it was shot in landscape. 🙂 Horses for courses...

@AAProds

Hi Al,

The cops are over here...the robbers are over there, here, there, here, there... Just turn the phone so that we can see both!

Call me old-fashioned, but there was a time when a phone was, well, for making phone calls.

I don't make videos to be watched on a cell phone (well, occasionally). I get insulted.

John CB

@Purbear @AAProds @browj2

I love the portrait landscape argument / debate. I find it amazing how it can be accepted in one art format but not another dependent on personal experience and historic context.

Artists and photographers have always used what was more aesthetically pleasing to a given subject matter. The end result was hung on a wall or put in a book. No-one questioned it's proportions.

Then with the introduction of the moving image and cinema, despite the ability to shutter down the screen to various proportions, because of the size of the screen and amount of audience packed into the viewing space, and that early film cameras really needed to be stable and mounted in the landscape position, we grew accustomed to the landscape orientation of that format. The introduction of a portable screen easily changed from one orientation to another equipped with a camera that has the same ability changed that almost overnight.

Younger minds didn't have to adapt or change their views on its use. They just use it in their hands the way they hold their phones in normal use and is easier to view on such devices in that orientation.

Older minds and those preferring to view such content on larger and less easily moved screens balk at the waste of screen space and resolution unless we have a dedicated landscape screen set up. Even then it goes against the grain of past experiences. I confess to being in the latter camp to my own chagrin.

Ray.

I actually think the advent of the good camera phone has been an absolute godsend for capturing those precious moments that you would have lost if not having a video camera handy. The video (and stabilisation) on my Galaxy S21 is absolutely stunning and, for example, when videoing a skier from a bouncy boat, is light-years ahead of my video camera. The only thing I miss is zoom. I will admit it is sometimes easier to track an object with my video clamped against my eye.

I also think the young minds have just added portrait viewing to their repertoire; they would still prefer their Marvel Cinematic Universe movies in landscape. Maybe it's us oldies that need to "expand" with the times! 😁 Not gunna happen!

@browj2, @AAProds, @CubeAce

Hi

. . . . Maybe it's us oldies that need to "expand" with the times!  . . . .

IMHO a lot of mobile phone users, of any age, do not know the implications and limitations of using mobile video.

The phone manufacturer's advertising is 'point, shoot and upload' - want to edit in a video editor - you would probably get no reponse or 'Why?'

There is nothing wrong with 9:16 AR video, it is the end use that dictates the portrait/landscape format just as the 'old masters', used portrait or landscape depending on the subject.

Use it by all means for the likes of Tik-Tok, Facebook, Instagram etc. however there are limitations and limited resolutions imposed by them and they are going to re-encode/compress the video even further to reduce the bandwidth needed for streaming.

However to use portrait phone video in a landscape video format, the limitations of doing so have to be accepted, ie it is going to be pillar boxed or have to be severly cropped to fit the landscape format.

John EB

@johnebaker

However to use portrait phone video in a landscape video format, the limitations of doing so have to be accepted, ie it is going to be pillar boxed or have to be severly cropped to fit the landscape format.

I partially agree, John. However, in the OP's case, a 4320 x 7680 portrait video will crop into 16:9 at greater than UHD/4k! Plenty of video pixels there to produce a great looking big-screen video (provided you can still see the subject).

@AAProds

Hi Al.

As I really started this hobby some time back in the early days of digital photography when the cameras really did not have video, when video was eventually available I did shoot some footage in a portrait orientation if the subject seemed to require it. I didn't think about it. The problem back then was then playing it back on the PC as such videos always played back in the landscape orientation. Finding a program at that time to just turn it 90° without the effort to edit it, just turn it around was frustrating and I eventually stopped doing it.

Taken in 2011. Things come on apace in the digital domain. That now looks awful but at the time it was taken, played back on a Sony CRT screen, it looked good. Future proofing? What future proofing? 11 years to look like 💩 That from a Fuji HS10 of which the stills still look reasonably good. Even the image stabilisation from that 1000 mm equivalent lens at full zoom as shown here was good. Just the SVGA resolution is not so hot.

Ray.

@AAProds

Hi Alwyn

. . . . However, in the OP's case, a 4320 x 7680 portrait video will crop into 16:9 at greater than UHD/4k! . . . .

Agreed, however as we do not know the nature of the video content eg if it is already a tight shot, eg talking head style, cropping to get full screen landscape may not be an option, also shooting this style in landscape may not be an option due to the requirement for a tight shot without the barrel distortion that would occur in landsape format.

John EB

@AAProds @CubeAce @browj2 @johnebaker

I think you are assuming wrong about the export format orientation.

@Purbear wants to Edit a portrait video and export for Tic-toc, hence I read he still wants to export in portrait, not landscape. So the entire convert portrait to landscape discussion becomes VOID in this context. The problem of OP is simply that the program does not support this export. It support same format in landscape.

The fact that Tic-toc does not allow the wanted format, argues for why the program does not support it, but technically it is not (should not be) more resource dependent than the landscape. I do understand most graphic cards (and plug-in software) are most likely landscape orientated in their design, but the strain on the resource should still be the same for portrait.

@shgrude

Hi,

As I indicated before, I can export to 4K 9:16 in MS2023. Set the project settings to 2160x3840 9:16 upon starting the project. When I go to export, the same settings appear. I showed this in another thread.

The only problem is that the user wants to use 8K in portrait mode but MS2023 will not export to 8K in portrait mode, only 4K and lower. I also pointed out that Tik-Tok and Instagram do not accept 8K (only full HD max), so there is no point in even trying. The OP should simply set up the program for 9:16 1080x1920 and export to that.

John CB

@shgrude

Hi

. . . . I think you are assuming wrong about the export format orientation. . . .

I do not think so - @Purbear clearly stated 'when I go to export a 16:9, 7680 x 4320 MPEG-4' above

. . . . wants to Edit a portrait video and export for Tic-toc . . . .

Agreed, however the export resolution being used is a portrait version of 8K ie 4320 x 7680 with a height that is not supported by the export format.

The Purbears workaround - 'when I go to export a 16:9, 7680 x 4320 MPEG-4' - is again 8K UHD video

Exporting at this resolution, and 4K UHD, is a waste of resources and pointless - as I said above :-

. . . . Tik-Tok, Facebook, Instagram etc. however there are limitations and limited resolutions imposed by them and they are going to re-encode/compress the video even further to reduce the bandwidth needed for.

Example social media sites restrictions are:

Facebook - 1280 x 720 px

Tik-Tok - 1080 x 1920 px.

Instagram - 1080 x 1920 px

Twitter - 1280 x 1024 px

The above also have varying files size and run time limits.

John EB

@johnebaker

Facebook - 1280 x 720 px

John, Facebook takes bigger than that: I gave it a 1440x1080P 50FPS/730mb file last week and it said "thank you very much, I'll look after that for you no probs".

@AAProds

Hi Al.

Have you checked what resolution the file plays back at on the website?

Being able to upload a file at a given resolution may not result in that file being shown at the same resolution.

I don't know as I don't use that platform but I think it would not be impossible for that to happen.

Ray.

OT - there's an opportunity here for a TV manufacturer to make a wall mounting TV on a mount that can be rotated 90 degrees clockwise or anti clockwise by pressing a button on the remote. Then the portrait lovers can watch their upright images without cropping or wasted screen space!

@CubeAce

Have you checked what resolution the file plays back at on the website?

Ray, 1440P. I must have uploaded 1920x1440P.

@ericlnz

. . . . OT - there's an opportunity here for a TV manufacturer to make a wall mounting TV on a mount that can be rotated 90 degrees clockwise or anti clockwise . . . .

I think some one else thought of that idea .

John EB