No output option at 100fps for 4k-100fps video

Marc-Goder wrote on 1/5/2026, 2:14 PM

Only exporting to WMV works at 100 FPS or more.

tom_frank wrote on 1/5/2026, 2:29 PM

Thanks for that info. I'll have to see if that WMV file can be re-compiled back to an .mp4 clip at 100 fps with AVC or HEVC codec with a different video editor without much loss of detail of a 4K video. But I have to wonder why VPX is not setup to do it directly!?

Only exporting to WMV works at 100 FPS or more.

johnebaker wrote on 1/5/2026, 2:41 PM

@tom_frank

Hi

In addition to Marc's comment, VPX 17 maximum framerates for 4K UHD (3840*2160) export is 60 fps for h.264/AVC , h.265/HEVC and AV1 (AV one).

Note: A graphics card with a video decoding/encoding module that supports decoding/encoding of the above 3 encoding formats. Without such a GPU the encoding is slow.

What is the intended audience that requires 100 fps?

John EB
Forum Moderator

tom_frank wrote on 1/6/2026, 10:55 PM

@tom_frank

Hi

In addition to Marc's comment, VPX 17 maximum framerates for 4K UHD (3840*2160) export is 60 fps for h.264/AVC , h.265/HEVC and AV1 (AV one).

Note: A graphics card with a video decoding/encoding module that supports decoding/encoding of the above 3 encoding formats. Without such a GPU the encoding is slow.

What is the intended audience that requires 100 fps?

John EB
Forum Moderator

The intended audience for 100 fps (or higher) are obviously not for old "movie-style" videos which rely on slower frame rates to smooth out action with frames having motion-blurring. Action video in digital formats are looking for smoother motion via more frames and smaller "jump steps" in motion from one frame to the next. Also, faster frame rates can be used for sharper slow motion video by slowing down the frames. It's not something for those wanting to mimic old film-style video, but there is a need for other scientific video uses such as product development, testing, motion study, and other uses that need sharp motion images at higher frame rates. VPX has apparently focused on "film movie" video creation but could broaden its use by simply allowing any video to be edited and output at its native frame rate. Even the really old simple (and free) video editors like Avidemux can do this, but unfortunately, with very minimal video editing. :-)

CubeAce wrote on 1/7/2026, 12:19 AM

@tom_frank

Hi.

Exported frame rates from video editors is often not a limitation of the editor but the codec used for export does not support those frame rates. Some video editors do not use some available codecs that may do as they quite likely have expensive usage fees attached to them. Some video editing software may be part of a group that developed the codec that allows such frame rates and therefore do not pay those fees.

As @Marc-Goder said. 100 fps is available as a wmv (Windows Media File) file which allows such frame rates to be exported.

Such produced files are often only playable on computers and limited to being played on certain operating systems. Traditionally in video, higher frame rate recording was only used to produce smoother slow motion in a final edit. It is not intended for faster frame rate playback.

The reason some editors that can produce higher frame rate exports but are limited in their editing capabilities is the other limitations in the recording codecs used. Such 'capable' codecs often have different limitations which make them unsuitable for normal video production.

Ray.

johnebaker wrote on 1/7/2026, 12:33 PM

@tom_frank

HI

In addition to @CubeAce comment.

While higher framerates can be beneficial in playing games, after recording, the editing and exporting is going to degrade the quantitive quality of the video, irrespective of the framerate.

Obviously a higher framerate may be better 'quantitatively' than 30 fps, however, it is the viewers 'perceived quality' that is the limiting factor, and is beyond your control. The difference between 60 fps and 100fps depends on the individual viewers perception of 'quality', combined with the differences in their monitors colour balance/calibration setup, frame rate and colour space capabilities, and while you can colour calibrate your monitor, I have mine calibrated, what they see can be very different to what you see.

The perceived quality can be 'helped' by adding a small amount of overall sharpness, Effects, Movie effects settings, Sharpness tab. I normally use a value of 25 -30 for 4K UHD video export and sometimes a slight adjustment of brightness and contrast or Gamma curve, or, if exporting as HDR, the HDR Gamma curve.

John EB

tom_frank wrote on 1/8/2026, 3:41 AM

Thanks for that info. I'll have to see if that WMV file can be re-compiled back to an .mp4 clip at 100 fps with AVC or HEVC codec with a different video editor without much loss of detail of a 4K video. But I have to wonder why VPX is not setup to do it directly!?

Only exporting to WMV works at 100 FPS or more.

@tom_frank

Hi.

Exported frame rates from video editors is often not a limitation of the editor but the codec used for export does not support those frame rates. Some video editors do not use some available codecs that may do as they quite likely have expensive usage fees attached to them. Some video editing software may be part of a group that developed the codec that allows such frame rates and therefore do not pay those fees.

As @Marc-Goder said. 100 fps is available as a wmv (Windows Media File) file which allows such frame rates to be exported.

Such produced files are often only playable on computers and limited to being played on certain operating systems. Traditionally in video, higher frame rate recording was only used to produce smoother slow motion in a final edit. It is not intended for faster frame rate playback.

The reason some editors that can produce higher frame rate exports but are limited in their editing capabilities is the other limitations in the recording codecs used. Such 'capable' codecs often have different limitations which make them unsuitable for normal video production.

Ray.

The video cameras I use can record at up to 240 fps using AVC/HEVC video codecs, BUT with resolutions considerably smaller than 4K. I can shoot 1080P-120fps and 720p-240fps, so those are the ones that VPX will accept and edit just fine but will NOT output the edited video in either AVC or HEVC at their native resolution AND frame rate. The best I can get with some manual fiddling of the movie settings is 60 fps. Many of my clips are simply trimmed with some fades between scenes and some text overlays. The video quality is already great and sharp with no playing around to modify the IQ settings. I can do most of the editing for simple stuff like this using AviDemux (free editor) and output in either AVC or HEVC at the native frame rate as the original clip. The cameras are "consumer grade action cameras" with CMOS imagers with fixed aperture lenses, so shutter speed is automatically set by the camera to get proper exposure along with variable gain on the CMOS with slower shutter speeds. The result is big visible motion "jump steps" between each frame unless neutral density filters are used to force the camera to slow down the shutter for proper exposure and create motion blurring to make the jump steps less noticeable but that blurs the entire frame when the camera is panning and is not acceptable. So these cheap digital cameras need to use much higher frame rates to keep the motion "jump steps" as small as possible for comfortable viewing. I didn't think that exporting videos at their higher native frame rates would be such a big deal with an editor having the capabilities of VPX when free editors can easily do it, using AVC and HEVC codecs.

FWIW, I tried exporting my VPX edited clips using the WMV codec, and then re-encoding them back into AVC/HEVC codec using AviDemux to crunch down the file sizes to a fraction of their WMV size with no obvious loss of video quality when viewed on my 4K monitor. It works and is faster than VPX takes to output the WMV file. This confirms to me that VPX should be able to this directly.

And while on the subject of AviDemux, it is the only editor I've found that can do very fast simple trimming of clips (with no other editing) and outputting the remaining clip in a matter of seconds with NO re-encoding, as long as the clips are trimmed at key frames which the editor can find instantly. It's another thing on my VPX wish list, but now it's all about AI editing (which is pretty amazing to say the least).

Thanks to all for the comments on this.

Tom