Heaven of LFS movie makers.

http://youtube-global.blogspot ... utm_content=Google+Reader

Good thing for some people, bad thing for most people. On my speed, 720p loads just intime that it doesnt start buffering

Quote from hazaky :

Good thing for some people, bad thing for most people. On my speed, 720p loads just intime that it doesnt start buffering

You still will be able to view movies in standart quality, high quality and 720p AFAIK.

I bet that high resolution is really going to help when Youtube doesn't allow high enough bitrates to even make 720p look good.

Choice is good, but I feel this option is going to be overkill for most people. 1080p is Blu-ray quality. I can see this being used well in very specialist cases and then abused by the enormous majority of Youtubers who will still be uploading crap but will now be compelled to upload ultra high resolution crap.

Quote from Electrik Kar :

Choice is good, but I feel this option is going to be overkill for most people. 1080p is Blu-ray quality. I can see this being used well in very specialist cases and then abused by the enormous majority of Youtubers who will still be uploading crap but will now be compelled to upload ultra high resolution crap.

Wouldn't bet on it, there's very little 720p crap and since encoding in 1080p takes a while longer, there should be even less of that.

I think it's good, only problem for me is I'll have trouble recording LFS footage in 1080 :doh:

Quote from morpha :

I think it's good, only problem for me is I'll have trouble recording LFS footage in 1080 :doh:

It's not a problem, you can e.g. record 1680x1050, crop it to 1680x945 and then upscale it to 1080p using proper filter (e.g. Lancoz3)

Quote from Shadowww :

It's not a problem, you can e.g. record 1680x1050, crop it to 1680x945 and then upscale it to 1080p using proper filter (e.g. Lancoz3)

I don't do scaling, at least not up. Easy to solve though, got an old 15" 566LM capable of interpolating 1920x1080 to its native res. Or maybe I'll just get a new 24" or 26", but I guess I'm too lazy to earn the money for that

Quote from morpha :

I don't do scaling, at least not up.

Why not? YouTube's player is smaller than 1080p anyways.

Quote from Shadowww :

Why not? YouTube's player is smaller than 1080p anyways.

In full screen, it could be full res, depending on the viewer's hardware.
Aside from that I don't see a point in doing half-arsed 1080p, either you do it right or you stick to 720p :twocents:

It's not half-arsed, upscaled 1680*smth looks better than 720p.

Quote from Shadowww :

It's not half-arsed, upscaled 1680*smth looks better than 720p.

But worse than 1080 native, it's a bit like upscaling DVDs for Blu Ray instead of getting a proper copy from the master. All I'm saying is if I'm doing 1080p, I'm doing it properly

Quote from morpha :

But worse than 1080 native, it's a bit like upscaling DVDs for Blu Ray instead of getting a proper copy from the master. All I'm saying is if I'm doing 1080p, I'm doing it properly

Wrong, it's not like upscaling DVD's. With bitrate YouTube does allows you wont see difference between upscaled 1680 and proper 1920, they both will look like upscaled good-quality 720p.

Quote from Shadowww :

Wrong, it's not like upscaling DVD's. With bitrate YouTube does allows you wont see difference between upscaled 1680 and proper 1920, they both will look like upscaled good-quality 720p.

YouTube is not the only place I put my videos. It's a deciding factor in choosing the resolution, as is the average and maximum consumer screen size. With YT offering 1080p, I consider it necessary to up the master resolution to at least the same, always leaving me with the option of a lower res encode, but not with a higher res.

Aside from that, I think my analogy is fairly accurate, except the bitrate limit is imposed by the source material. There is no point in increasing the bitrate beyond the rate needed for the higher resolution from DVD to BR.

storage is limited or google have unlimited?

Quote from Shadowww :

Why not? YouTube's player is smaller than 1080p anyways.

If you're going to watch Youtube movies in the player then what's the point in 1080p? The maximum resolution needed would simply be the resolution of the player itself. Or have I missed something??

Quote from Electrik Kar :

If you're going to watch Youtube movies in the player then what's the point in 1080p? The maximum resolution needed would simply be the resolution of the player itself. Or have I missed something??

Well YouTube limits 720p bitrate to ~3000kbit/s (AFAIK) and 1080p to ~8000kbit/s (not sure about that), so 1080p downscaled will look betr.

Quote from Gegry1992 :

storage is limited or google have unlimited?

Google have over 9000 terabytes of HDD's

Quote from Shadowww :

Google have over 9000 terabytes of HDD's

I'm pretty sure you meant petabytes.

And by the way, youtube has already added this 1080p support. Some of my videos have also already been automatically updated to use that feature.

Quote from morpha :

I think it's good, only problem for me is I'll have trouble recording LFS footage in 1080 :doh:

I experimented with this just recently. 30 fps was the maximum I could capture at using fraps but I then doubled the framerate in the final video. Even 30 fps meant that the hdd was writing 110MB/s

Here it is if anyone's interested. The flash versions aren't 60fps nor full hd but there's a link to the original 290MB file: http://vari.1g.fi/kuvat/temp/L ... sCut.1080p.60fps.XviD.avi

Quote from Electrik Kar :

If you're going to watch Youtube movies in the player then what's the point in 1080p? The maximum resolution needed would simply be the resolution of the player itself. Or have I missed something??

In 1080p YouTube will allow higher bitrate

So e.g. if player is 640x360, then 1280x720 downscaled (max. 3000kbit/s) will look better than 640x360 (~1000kbit/s).

P.S.: All 1080p's I have seen are under 4000kbit/s according to MediaInfo. :3

Quote from Velociround :

I'm pretty sure you meant petabytes.

** puts his glasses on

YYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!!11

Quote from Crommi :

I bet that high resolution is really going to help when Youtube doesn't allow high enough bitrates to even make 720p look good.

Exactly what I was thinking. 1080p on youtube is just so much marketing garbage. Even if you had a 30" monitor 720p would be more than good enough quality if it were using a decent MPEG encoder and high enough bitrate.

As a point of reference, DVD's only run 575 resolution but still average 5-6 Mb/s off the disc even with MPEG compression. Most peoples broadband can't even cover that let alone 720 or 1080.

Most people should be able to DL 600 KB/s. That's using only about 1/4 of my bandwidth.

I don't see the practicality of 1080p YouTube, as the HD resolutions are already terrible with Youtube because of Flash. They need to transition to something more efficient.

The average broadband speed in the UK is 2mbit, thats ~256 KB/s download...

That's tragic! The WORST broadband you can get around here is about 6 (which isn't good enough to consistently stream a DVD), but for very little $$ more, you can get from 10 up to 30 mbit. All without throttling, very very relaxed bandwidth limits, and the only downtime is at like 3:30 AM for like a minute.

Quote from Jakg :

The average broadband speed in the UK is 2mbit, thats ~256 KB/s download...

Wow. Just wow.


Move to Latvia.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

They need to transition to something more efficient.

If would be ideal if developers of ALL browsers would choose H264 for <video> tag :s