It played instantly here too, but I was actually saying how the loading time would be if the quality was as said by Linsen:
It played instantly here too, but I was actually saying how the loading time would be if the quality was as said by Linsen:
yeah, looks good, discovered it already, for my NFS undercover vids :hide:
Yep, that was the point I was trying to make. The Where's Matt Video and all the other high quality ones I tried were loading quite fast for me, too. To me it seems like youtube has achieved a good compromise of quality and loading time.
I still don't like the quality because of the low bitrate. 720p is three times as large as 640x480 (the regular "high quality" youtube videos are 640x480). But, the bitrate is equal. For the quality to be exactly equal, the bitrate of youtube HD videos would have to be 6000kbps. Otherwise, it's like trying to shove a watermellon through a tailpipe. Sure, you could do it, but you would have to cut it up first.
I mean, when it isn't fullscreen it looks good because it is scaled down and you cannot see the compression artifacts as easy. But when you make it fullscreen it is atrocious.
I mean, when it isn't fullscreen it looks good because it is scaled down and you cannot see the compression artifacts as easy. But when you make it fullscreen it is atrocious.
I meant 720x576i50 but you're right that the compression can vary. It was more a general comment about the fact that a 2000 kb/s video can never hold as much information as a TV broadcasting technology that we have been using since the 60s of the last century.
This is a proper HD youtube clip if someone wants to see the quality:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TEKN-NHg6Rk&fmt=22 (Army of Darkness Theatrical Ending)
Looks great even in fullscreen. I can only stream it without interruptions when my broadband isn't being throttled though.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TEKN-NHg6Rk&fmt=22 (Army of Darkness Theatrical Ending)
Looks great even in fullscreen. I can only stream it without interruptions when my broadband isn't being throttled though.
Well, yes, you cannot really compare digital to analog if that's what you're saying.
WOW. That's incredible, it didn't take any longer to load than the normal videos and had amazing quality. I hope I can find more videos with this quality.
That's because it's the same bitrate.
It's loading too slow for my patience!God damn thats nice quality!
Veeeery good quality, but would freeze for a short while every 5 or so seconds to buffer.
1mb connection here. >_>
I'll put it like this. Do you think that the DVD version of "Army of Darkness" is covered with 16x16 blocks like this youtube "HD" version is?
Of course it isn't, which means that, while the quality is okish for an online streaming system, it is by no means amazing or great, and most certainly not HD. If it were HD it would have to better than SD which it isn't as DVDs aren't a blocky mess.
What I'm saying is that I would prefer lower resolution in decent quality than high resolution in poor quality.
That's a big improvement. Oddly enough the higher res version plays much quicker too, (probably lower server load).
I agree that it is poor quality. But HD specification only has to do with frame rate and resolution. HD just means 720p, 1080p, or 2160p. Technically, it is HD because it is in 720p. But I agree, the quality is horrible. Just because video is high definition does not nessesarily mean that it is high quality. That I'll agree with.
Anything that means I don`t have to sit after watching something on youtube and whine about how shit it looks is great.
I`m glad they`re finally dragging the quality up. The fact that it`s averaging out streaming at about 5-600K/s is nice as well considering some of the sites streaming similar quality are using a lot higher bandwidth.
I`m glad they`re finally dragging the quality up. The fact that it`s averaging out streaming at about 5-600K/s is nice as well considering some of the sites streaming similar quality are using a lot higher bandwidth.
Technically you're probably right. Semantics aside though I don't see how anything that looks terrible when compared to DVD can be called "High Definition".
Sigh. People can't do right for doing wrong.
People say "omg we wants ut00b hi quality yo", and they give us a much higher quality of streaming avalible than before (and there's no denying that).
So, limited mainly by bandwidth and storage space, the "HD" quality isn't as good as the HD quality that you or I are familiar with through next gen consoles and DVD/blueray. This is to be expected and is understandable, and yet y'all are still bitching "omg itz not az g00d as dvd u suck".
Noooo.
People say "omg we wants ut00b hi quality yo", and they give us a much higher quality of streaming avalible than before (and there's no denying that).
So, limited mainly by bandwidth and storage space, the "HD" quality isn't as good as the HD quality that you or I are familiar with through next gen consoles and DVD/blueray. This is to be expected and is understandable, and yet y'all are still bitching "omg itz not az g00d as dvd u suck".
Noooo.
I didn't say it's worse than Blu-Ray, I said it's worse than SD. Or more technically, the bits per pixel rate is far too low.
Personally, I don't see the problem at all. So, tbh, I can't see why you have one either. Unless you all expect far to much from everything. 
Just to chip in, technical details aside, on my 19" monitor it looks as good as I could hope from a video streaming website. It loads fast enough, and I would be happy to watch a movie that quality. If I want high quality I'll buy a DVD or Blueray, but that YouTube link I posted is such an improvement over old videos I don't see how I could complain 
It is alot better then SD to me. It just depends on the video. Look at this TF2 video, the quality is better then the other "HD" videos that have been posted:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rYBhxdtWtEU&fmt=22
It still looks better when downloading the original HD from STEAM
Pretty good for Youtube anyway.
Which is exactly what I mean..
But that's exactly what I was talking about:.
It seems that if you watch enough Flash video you don't see the blocks anymore and you forget what normal TV looks like (or tbh nowadays I might have to say "looked like" considering some of the ultra low bitrate broudcasts that are out there).
Although you do make another good point. x264 works very well on anime and animated content, as it has much less detail, so your link does look quite good, yes, even at 2000 kb/s.
Most content would look mich nicer at the same bitrate with a resolution of 576p or 576i.
Youtube no longer entirely shite?
(114 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG