141–150 of 200 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Youtube mostly uses vp9 these days (I think it might fallback to h264 depending on the device?) You can confirm this by loading a video, right clicking somewhere in the player and opening 'stats for nerds'
Safari on Mac OS Catalina is always h264
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> These are for their HEVC encodes. Really? I wasn't aware Netflix even offered anything other than H.264 at > VMAF does correlate pretty tightly with subjective metrics. This is a very detailed subject, I summed up many of my thoughts on the differences in my demuxed talk last year here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCUsXhSPyyw Thanks, I'll check that out when I have the time. I'd still emphasize that it's quite…
Youtube mostly uses vp9 these days (I think it might fallback to h264 depending on the device?) You can confirm this by loading a video, right clicking somewhere in the player and opening 'stats for nerds'
Looks amazing and while I would like to enjoy such quality and am willing to pay for the premium plan (in fact I do already), I still can't watch the 4K content even in a world where I accept DRM modules in my browser, because some DRM plugins seem to be more equal than others.
Do we still need an Intel Kaby Lake or later CPU for 4K DRM decoding? (And Windows... forgot about that.) If so, Netflix is on the wrong side of the CPU war with AMD ascending.
And according to https://help.netflix.com/en/node/23931 you can use any cpu if you have an NVIDIA gpu starting with 3gb version of 1050.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The arguments Netflix made for this highly model-specific DRM never made sense to me. There are 4K rips of pretty much every Netflix show available for download on various bays related to piracy. So why bother locking your paying customers out of 4K content? What's the upside? Also: I'm reasonably convinced that NetFlix is violating the law, at least in Australia, by advertising that their content is 4K and then arbi…
In a lot of cases the decode is happening on the GPU anyway, so requiring a specific CPU is doubly pointless. I figured it was some backdoor Intel scheme where they paid Netflix to be exclusive.
That seems like a pretty impressive achievement! Question for anyone here: What do you use to play 4K/HDR? I have an Apple TV 4K, which can do 4K Dolby Vision playback and looks ok, but the Apple TV tends to have some jittering when streaming certain shows (very noticeable in panning shots of animation). The sound quality is also noticeably worse on my set with it (it doesn’t seem to be able to do direct pass through…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The arguments Netflix made for this highly model-specific DRM never made sense to me. There are 4K rips of pretty much every Netflix show available for download on various bays related to piracy. So why bother locking your paying customers out of 4K content? What's the upside? Also: I'm reasonably convinced that NetFlix is violating the law, at least in Australia, by advertising that their content is 4K and then arbi…
>Also: I'm reasonably convinced that NetFlix is violating the law, at least in Australia, by advertising that their content is 4K and then arbitrarily blocking access to the 4K streams. This is called "bait & switch", and the fines are eyewatering, even for large corporations. Nah, they have their asses covered. I went to the website and tried to sign up, and at the first mention of 4k (when you're choosing a plan),…
The phrasing makes it sound like external conditions, outside of Netflix's control are the reason 4K may not be available.
The reality is they sell two subscription levels: 4K and a HD-only one, but then after you've given them your money, they outright block access to 4K streams on a device that is physically capable of playing the stream.
I can play 3D games in 4K 60fps. I can stream YouTube at 8K. I can watch blu-ray at 4K with 2% CPU utilisation. For crying out loud, I have an NVIDIA RTX 2080 Ti and gigabit fibre!
But no. Sorry sir, your CPU is the wrong model, and Netflix cannot trust it. No 4K for you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a lot of cases the decode is happening on the GPU anyway, so requiring a specific CPU is doubly pointless. I figured it was some backdoor Intel scheme where they paid Netflix to be exclusive.
No. At the time that cpu family was only one that had a gpu with support for necessary drm schemes and 10bit HEVC decode.
Which is nuts, because you can buy HDCP stripper boxes for a few tens of dollars from several Chinese suppliers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They may even have made it worse: from the "ladder" comparisons, it looks like they jump to higher resolutions at lower average bitrates now, so if you're stuck at 1080p you're going to be getting worse quality after these changes than before. No they have not made it worse. 1080p encoded at lower bitrate can look better than 720p at a higher bitrate. Or vice versa. Even to the trained eye. It depends on the scene…
> No they have not made it worse. 1080p encoded at lower bitrate can look better than 720p at a higher bitrate. Or vice versa. Even to the trained eye. It depends on the scene dynamics.* Well, of course that's correct. Take 1080p encoded at 100 Mbps and 720 encoded at 300 Mbps, I guarantee you that 1080p wins every time. :-) > In the ladders they posted (called a RD chart) we can clearly see they have made a better s…
"As a side note, we do have some additional points, not shown in the plots, that are used in resolution limited scenarios — such as a streaming session limited to 720p or 1080p highest encoding resolution. Such points lie under (or to the right of) the convex hull main ladder curve but allow quality to ramp up in resolution limited scenarios."
Any idea why none of these services supports queueing some movies you’d like to watch, downloading them in the middle of the night in astounding bitrates, and allowing you to watch on your TV? As far as I can tell only the mobile apps support this, not the “streaming boxes.”
> Sometimes we ingest a title that would need more bits at the highest end of the quality spectrum — even higher than the 16 Mbps limit of the fixed-bitrate ladder. From just a cursory inspection using my Apple TV 4K, 12 Mbps is their target bitrate but their ceiling was ~16 Mbps. That's still only a third of what AppleTV+ offers (36/48) and only 2/3 of Disney+ (18/24). Netflix is still higher than Prime Video (10/14…
I've noticed that ATV+ looks the best, which is much appreciated. However, what has been driving me insane with all these services is how the bitrate is completely inconsistent throughout, depending on network congestion. Every service I subscribe to will "automagically" lower the bitrate if the network can't handle it. Which is fine, I get it. The thing is, it's the only way to watch anything, and depending on the c…