• ITU approves the H.265 format, will let people stream 1080p content with half the bandwidth and 4K v
    68 replies, posted
[QUOTE=sambooo;39368292]It's already horrible in 1080p because you see pimples, stretch marks and scars, it'd be terrifying not arousing.[/QUOTE] I can't wait to see all the sexy sweat pores and badly applied makeup on pornstars 20 years past their prime
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;39367945]I don't have a 4K monitor yet so whatever.[/QUOTE] Doesn't mean it's not beneficial to you. I'll take faster buffering over slower buffering any day of the week.
[QUOTE=mblunk;39368585]Doesn't mean it's not beneficial to you. I'll take faster buffering over slower buffering any day of the week.[/QUOTE] I should have quoted someone on that because I meant that as a response to people getting excited for things like "4K porn" when the technology to view it isn't really affordably available yet.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;39367598]Oh boy I can't wait for 4K porn to roll out[/QUOTE] HD porn is a kinda mixed spot. High frame rate and resolution works really well for porn, but at the same time, you can only get high quality porn by paying for it.
[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;39369112]HD porn is a kinda mixed spot. High frame rate and resolution works really well for porn, but at the same time, you can only get high quality porn by paying for it.[/QUOTE] Then you aren't looking hard enough.
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;39368853]I should have quoted someone on that because I meant that as a response to people getting excited for things like "4K porn" when the technology to view it isn't really affordably available yet.[/QUOTE] 4K video is also beneficial even if you don't have a screen to match. For example, on a 1080p monitor: 720p: [url]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-9xAO1Z_a8_s/UQQ897AZJYI/AAAAAAAAIA8/fLD1ZeWvnLs/s0/2013-01-26_15-30-43.jpg[/url] [img]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-_sTbzdsTusM/UQRAGji6zII/AAAAAAAAICE/OsCyXGJdTRc/s0/2013-01-26_15-44-09.png[/img] 1080p: [url]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-S6V6KkEOEvg/UQQ9HUFuv6I/AAAAAAAAIBE/I6o8ll8NLVY/s0/2013-01-26_15-31-23.jpg[/url] [img]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-EIyr5YsryiQ/UQQ_5_DsKQI/AAAAAAAAIB8/NaEx72M6CdU/s0/2013-01-26_15-43-18.png[/img] 4K: [url]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-s1ZfocEjxvA/UQQ9_hIaJsI/AAAAAAAAIBQ/1j5tztnXbzk/s0/2013-01-26_15-35-07.jpg[/url] [img]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-hjFnDy4lHns/UQQ_s44h_UI/AAAAAAAAIB0/tsfPCXHuHCk/s0/2013-01-26_15-42-26.png[/img] Open each in a tab and flip through them, and notice how the 4K stream has a lot more detail than 1080p even on a merely 1080p display.
Isn't that because it's a downscaled 4K that makes 1080p look worse in that example though?
[QUOTE=Flubadoo;39369366]Isn't that because it's a downscaled 4K that makes 1080p look worse in that example though?[/QUOTE] Yeah I guess if you were capable of 4K recording you could just downscale to 1080p and recompress with high quality before uploading, but your original 4K media would still look better (assuming people could actually play it.)
[QUOTE=DrogenViech;39366856]I only have 2 Mbps, fml :suicide: [editline]26th January 2013[/editline] Wait, does that mean i will be able to watch 1080p on youtube soon? I can almost watch 720p in realtime on my shitty 2 mbit line :v:[/QUOTE] haha same, just last night I was raging at this channel on youtube for only streaming in 720p and nothing else, finally some love for shitty internet.
If I can [i]almost[/i] watch 1080p realtime already, does this mean I'll be able to now with my 3.5mbps connection?
what does this mean for livestreaming
Is the H.265 an open standard, or will you have to pay millions per year to use it like h.264?
[QUOTE=smurfy;39366888]Does the licensing allow this to be used in HTML5 video? I know H.264 couldn't be used because of problems around that[/QUOTE] Nobody really cares about the licensing, if they did we'd be seeing WebM used a lot more. This will be used eventually regardless of the licensing rules (By either relying on platform support like Microsoft, Apple or Mozilla do, or including their own decoder like Google does)
does anyone know when this might actually be implemented
[QUOTE=Flubadoo;39369366]Isn't that because it's a downscaled 4K that makes 1080p look worse in that example though?[/QUOTE] I often watch 720p youtube in the enlarged player instead of fullscreen, it looks great that way
doesnt how much you can get off a connection also depend on drive write speed? (mine only goes to about 1.5mb/s and my connection is 10mbps) so either way its excellend development
[QUOTE=lNloruzenchi;39372843]doesnt how much you can get off a connection also depend on drive write speed? (mine only goes to about 1.5mb/s and my connection is 10mbps) so either way its excellend development[/QUOTE] Mb =/= MB You'd need an 800Mb connection to reach the limits of even the lowest of modern HDD's.
[QUOTE=lNloruzenchi;39372843]doesnt how much you can get off a connection also depend on drive write speed? (mine only goes to about 1.5mb/s and my connection is 10mbps) so either way its excellend development[/QUOTE] streams are loaded into and out of your RAM. not written on your disc
[QUOTE=Barbarian887;39372899]streams are loaded into and out of your RAM. not written on your disc[/QUOTE] This is also another factor
[QUOTE=RoadOfGirl;39371957]does anyone know when this might actually be implemented[/QUOTE] [quote=the article]It could be 12 to 18 months, maybe longer, before the first devices with H.265 hardware acceleration make it to market.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Barbarian887;39372899]streams are loaded into and out of your RAM. not written on your disc[/QUOTE] thanks, just asking for clarification on how its works
[QUOTE=lNloruzenchi;39372843]doesnt how much you can get off a connection also depend on drive write speed? (mine only goes to about 1.5mb/s and my connection is 10mbps) so either way its excellend development[/QUOTE] Your hard drive writes at 1.5MB/s? You should look at getting a new one then.
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;39367258]300kBs/ :([/QUOTE] Try 170kBs/ It's absolutely ridiculous.
[QUOTE=TGiFallen;39371743]Is the H.265 an open standard, or will you have to pay millions per year to use it like h.264?[/QUOTE] It's not an open standard, and has a bunch of people with patents claiming they own all possible ways to make videos on computer sitting on top of it. [QUOTE=TheDecryptor;39371905]Nobody really cares about the licensing, if they did we'd be seeing WebM used a lot more. This will be used eventually regardless of the licensing rules (By either relying on platform support like Microsoft, Apple or Mozilla do, or including their own decoder like Google does)[/QUOTE] You say that, but YouTube has WebM support on nearly all videos.
Yeah, but they're only doing WebM because they're run by Google, and Google has a strange love/hate relationship with their own product. Are any other videos sites supporting it? Vimeo and DailyMotion are all H.264. Google said they were removing H.264 support from Chrome back in 2009 or so, then never followed through with it. Chromium has never supported it (since it's open source), so the best it can do is WebM. The lack of momentum behind WebM is the reason Mozilla decided that it was a lost cause and decided to support H.264 via platform decoders.
[QUOTE=Saxon;39366821]What are Youtube and Netflix going to do with all there extra bandwith now? :v:[/QUOTE] Probably offer the same videos at the same bandwidth, but higher quality. Over the years YT has increased their bandwidth options. [editline]27th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=mblunk;39369316]4K video is also beneficial even if you don't have a screen to match. For example, on a 1080p monitor: 720p: [url]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-9xAO1Z_a8_s/UQQ897AZJYI/AAAAAAAAIA8/fLD1ZeWvnLs/s0/2013-01-26_15-30-43.jpg[/url] [img]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-_sTbzdsTusM/UQRAGji6zII/AAAAAAAAICE/OsCyXGJdTRc/s0/2013-01-26_15-44-09.png[/img] 1080p: [url]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-S6V6KkEOEvg/UQQ9HUFuv6I/AAAAAAAAIBE/I6o8ll8NLVY/s0/2013-01-26_15-31-23.jpg[/url] [img]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-EIyr5YsryiQ/UQQ_5_DsKQI/AAAAAAAAIB8/NaEx72M6CdU/s0/2013-01-26_15-43-18.png[/img] 4K: [url]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-s1ZfocEjxvA/UQQ9_hIaJsI/AAAAAAAAIBQ/1j5tztnXbzk/s0/2013-01-26_15-35-07.jpg[/url] [img]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-hjFnDy4lHns/UQQ_s44h_UI/AAAAAAAAIB0/tsfPCXHuHCk/s0/2013-01-26_15-42-26.png[/img] Open each in a tab and flip through them, and notice how the 4K stream has a lot more detail than 1080p even on a merely 1080p display.[/QUOTE] That's due to the 4k Stream having more detail during encoding and a bigger bitrate. Give 1080p more than a few mbps and it will look great. That's a bad example and doesn't make sense in the real world. [editline]27th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=rampageturke 2;39370963]what does this mean for livestreaming[/QUOTE] Means you'll need a much better CPU if you're livestreaming but can pump out better quality at the same bitrate.
Does this mean I will soon be able to watch 360p YouTube videos with out constant buffering on my 0.49Mbps connection? [editline]27th January 2013[/editline] :dance:
[QUOTE=Brt5470;39374977]Probably offer the same videos at the same bandwidth, but higher quality. Over the years YT has increased their bandwidth options. [editline]27th January 2013[/editline] That's due to the 4k Stream having more detail during encoding and a bigger bitrate. Give 1080p more than a few mbps and it will look great. That's a bad example and doesn't make sense in the real world. [editline]27th January 2013[/editline] Means you'll need a much better CPU if you're livestreaming but can pump out better quality at the same bitrate.[/QUOTE] Of course 1080p can look great at native res, but my point is that supersampled content will still look better.
Sorry if this is a stupid question but I don't know much about video codecs and all that stuff, but would a 720p video also be improved if it was encoded with this?
I just watched all the 4K videos from Jacob Schwarz on YT. [url]http://www.youtube.com/user/jacobschwarz/videos[/url] Just checked my router to see my bandwith and traffic. Watching 12 ~2-3min videos in 4K was about 5.5GB traffic. (And YT used my all of my download to buffer the vids) Reducing bandwith and traffic would be really nice.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.