60FPS coming to Youtube - Comments (Page 2)

Extraordinary

2014-06-27 22:00

i only watch my movies at 60fps. have been for years. (SVP) if i start looking at 30fps now it seems super boring somehow. I guess its just what you are used to

Really? I tried to watch them using active vision on my TV, I think its a fake 100Hz, but I couldn't take the film seriously, everything was too smooth and weird Like you say though, if you're used to something

#4859563

Loobyluggs

2014-06-27 22:30

It's meaningless. Makes no difference to the quality of the content. Now then, upping the stream to H265 would've been newsworthy. I may have even raised one of my eyebrows.

#4859566

NiColaoS

2014-06-27 22:34

HTML5 only? 1080p only?

html5 only is true already if you're using Chrome ( .mp4 or VP9 ). Just disable all Flash in about:plugins. The same for IE11 ( the best .mp4 only with DXVA ). Just activate the active-x protection. Same partially for Firefox. Just disable entirely Flash. Though only 720p for now. For 1080p requires something else that Mozilla is building already.

#4859639

siriq

2014-06-27 23:48

It was just right about time. We may see some benefits after google buys twitchtv.

#4859736

ricardonuno1980

2014-06-28 02:02

Da hell? 35? youtube was always capped at 29.970, it was never 35, and it was certainly never 60 in 2008 to 2010, you could upload a 60 but it will make it 29.970 and motion blur will look weird.

Without any doubt - up to 60 fps capped (2008 to '10 or '11) in Youtube. I always use CRT monitor. 🙂 You got doubt if 30 or 60 fps because the fault is LCD. :P

#4859748

xIcarus

2014-06-28 02:26

how about improve that damn player first? I mean when I switch resolutions and skip ahead, 25% of the time it just buffers a bit and then I have to skip again for it to start buffering again. and DAMMIT MAKE THAT AUTO HD SETTING WORK. I SHOULDN'T NEED to use browser extensions when that is the most basic of the basic functions that piece of **** player needs to accomplish. no, I don't want the player to 'auto-detect' my settings half way into the video and switch resolutions when it's too late. and keep the current resolution when redirecting to a diferent video through annotations. it's god. damn. annoying. to have to switch to hd every time I click on an annotation. and while you're at it, maybe make that bloody fullscreen playlist menu focus on MY CURRENT video instead of THE BEGINNING OF THE PLAYLIST. but yeah, we have 60 fps. NICE. AWESOME. I'm sorry, but I feel like this is damn insulting.

#4859799

Fender178

2014-06-28 04:28

Thats cool that youtube is finally going to 60 Fps. This means that LPers or videogamers who make reviews are not capped at 30 FPS And they do not have to extra Stuff to make their Videos look nicer at 30 FPS.

#4859808

Supersourav99

2014-06-28 04:45

60 FPS would make no difference to what YT does to process the videos! 🙁

#4859872

HonoredShadow

2014-06-28 08:29

how about improve that damn player first? I mean when I switch resolutions and skip ahead, 25% of the time it just buffers a bit and then I have to skip again for it to start buffering again. and DAMMIT MAKE THAT AUTO HD SETTING WORK. I SHOULDN'T NEED to use browser extensions when that is the most basic of the basic functions that piece of **** player needs to accomplish. no, I don't want the player to 'auto-detect' my settings half way into the video and switch resolutions when it's too late. and keep the current resolution when redirecting to a diferent video through annotations. it's god. damn. annoying. to have to switch to hd every time I click on an annotation. and while you're at it, maybe make that bloody fullscreen playlist menu focus on MY CURRENT video instead of THE BEGINNING OF THE PLAYLIST. but yeah, we have 60 fps. NICE. AWESOME. I'm sorry, but I feel like this is damn insulting.

Use Firefox/Palemoon/Chrome and this awesome addon: http://www.chromeactions.com/ Tick options to suit like what you mentioned about buffering ahead and auto HD. Thank me later 😉

#4859932

xIcarus

2014-06-28 10:13

Use Firefox/Palemoon/Chrome and this awesome addon: http://www.chromeactions.com/ Tick options to suit like what you mentioned about buffering ahead and auto HD. Thank me later 😉

Thanks man, I will try it. I've actually ran out of good extensions. Although this shouldn't be needed if that player would've been coded correctly, but still. I appreciate a lot.

#4859935

HonoredShadow

2014-06-28 10:21

Just post back what you think. I can't be without this addon. Talked to the developers and helped them bug fix too. Good people.

#4860036

xIcarus

2014-06-28 12:25

This extension is actually really good, and it freaking works flawlessly, even when clicking on annotations. And it seems to load videos more efficiently. Kudos to you!

#4860143

Loobyluggs

2014-06-28 14:16

60 FPS would make no difference to what YT does to process the videos! 🙁

Yup. I'm still in awe they are successful with such poor quality.

#4860188

Primey0

2014-06-28 15:08

i only watch my movies at 60fps. have been for years. (SVP) if i start looking at 30fps now it seems super boring somehow. I guess its just what you are used to

Movies aren't shot in 60fps so good job lying.

#4860194

moab600

2014-06-28 15:21

Movies aren't shot in 60fps so good job lying.

SVP makes movies to play accroding to ur refresh rate. 24fps typcial TV or movie is bad very bad. SVP make movies play at 60fps, just try it and see if he is lying

#4860267

darkshadow5k5

2014-06-28 17:19

SVP makes movies to play accroding to ur refresh rate. 24fps typcial TV or movie is bad very bad. SVP make movies play at 60fps, just try it and see if he is lying

SVP is interpolation, it's the same ****ty "smoothing" tv's have had for years; it's not actually 60 fps because, as the other guy said, movies aren't shot at 60fps. It's like saying The Hobbit shot at 48 fps looks the same as the Hobbit interpolated at 48 fps; complete rubbish.

#4860282

moab600

2014-06-28 17:29

SVP is interpolation, it's the same ****ty "smoothing" tv's have had for years; it's not actually 60 fps because, as the other guy said, movies aren't shot at 60fps. It's like saying The Hobbit shot at 48 fps looks the same as the Hobbit interpolated at 48 fps; complete rubbish.

yes it's not a real 60FPS, but it gives u a feeling of it. movies are smooth with SVP, i can't see movie or video without this interpolated 60 fps. it makes HUGE difference.

#4860636

Loobyluggs

2014-06-29 00:41

yes it's not a real 60FPS, but it gives u a feeling of it. movies are smooth with SVP, i can't see movie or video without this interpolated 60 fps. it makes HUGE difference.

It's an interesting point. One way of looking at it is by stretching the quantity of frames you are altering the original motion blur, aperture and shutter speed. Some might say it is presumptuous to try and dictate these factors at home when the Director of Photography probably knows best. Movies may not be at the frame rate you want them to be, but if the DoP was worth the money spent on their expertise during filming, I think they would have taken the 24 frames per second into their equations. The only time in cinematic history (that I can personally recall) this was not the case was The Hobbit. The problem they had was they used the correct shutter speeds and angles for 24 frames per second, but were shooting a 48 frames per second movie.

#4861019

ricardonuno1980

2014-06-29 15:52

Sorry, deleted.

#4863678

WittyScreenName

2014-07-03 02:47

Im late to the party,i know,but something just nagged at me: Audio quality. 60fps is nice and all but video is only half the experience,youtube needs to up its kbp/s limitations for audio.