Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Well, we won't need those "high" streaming bitrates when we are watching only 10 minute shorts on our 5" phone screens when long form content and them big TVs go the way of the Dodo bird as has been foretold.

Now that was me being sarcastic; I even used the appropriate emoji to make it obvious. Call upon me anytime; always here to help.

All the big boys are looking to shave the bit rate, not increase it. The AV1 codec is coming soon but even then they will be looking to make huge savings.

Remember NTSC? Never the same colour. Streaming is a bit like that. Never the same resolution.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

All the big boys are looking to shave the bit rate, not increase it. The AV1 codec is coming soon but even then they will be looking to make huge savings.

Remember NTSC? Never the same colour. Streaming is a bit like that. Never the same resolution.

Every business looks for ways to control costs, but cannibalizing your product is not how to do it.

If a new and more advanced codec allows for the more efficient use of bandwidth without sacrificing quality, then what is wrong with that? It is the quality that matters here. A new codec might make 8K physical media a reality; an advancement here could benefit both digital and disc fans.

I seriously doubt that any of the streaming providers want to offer lower quality after all they have invested to reach the quality levels in existence now. Most, if not all, companies look to improve their products, not make them worse.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Remember NTSC? Never the same colour.

I think you mean, Never Twice the Same Color .

Some more trivia: When I used to show and tell the LaserDisc folks would always ask, “How long can it record.”

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

I think you mean, Never Twice the Same Color .

Some more trivia: When I used to show and tell the LaserDisc folks would always ask, “How long can it record.”

That's not too surprising of a question as the laserdisc player came along during the heyday of VCRs.

This was a time when the consumer could use their own device to record content from cable broadcasts and play it back on any similar device anywhere. Unlike now, where cable companies try to make you use a DVR that they rent to their victims, er customers, yeah, that's the word I meant. They do not want us making hard copies of broadcast content anymore, so it's a little harder now than it needs to be.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

The AV1 codec is coming soon but even then they will be looking to make huge savings.

It will be interesting to see how the use of AV1 develops. Will the interest in AV1 continue after the changes the HEVC groups have made in terms of licensing and fees?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

I think you mean, Never Twice the Same Color .

Some more trivia: When I used to show and tell the LaserDisc folks would always ask, “How long can it record.”

Colour is U.K., so yeah fair enough!

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Every business looks for ways to control costs, but cannibalizing your product is not how to do it.

If a new and more advanced codec allows for the more efficient use of bandwidth without sacrificing quality, then what is wrong with that? It is the quality that matters here. A new codec might make 8K physical media a reality; an advancement here could benefit both digital and disc fans.

I seriously doubt that any of the streaming providers want to offer lower quality after all they have invested to reach the quality levels in existence now. Most, if not all, companies look to improve their products, not make them worse.

I don't agree.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I don't agree.

Colour me not surprised.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

It will be interesting to see how the use of AV1 develops. Will the interest in AV1 continue after the changes the HEVC groups have made in terms of licensing and fees?

They are claiming 30% savings with it apparently. Yeah, it will be interesting to see which one wins out. It has some string backers for sure. Personally, I don’t think there is any such thing as ‘Royalty free’ in this sense.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Colour me not surprised.

Thanks for using the correct spelling. . The British way is always the best way.

[stonesfan129]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

It will be interesting to see how the use of AV1 develops. Will the interest in AV1 continue after the changes the HEVC groups have made in terms of licensing and fees?

What is AV1 and what even supports it currently in the home theater arena? 10-bit AVC is interesting but again nothing supports it.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by stonesfan129

What is AV1 and what even supports it currently in the home theater arena? 10-bit AVC is interesting but again nothing supports it.

AV1 info here. AFAIK, no hardware at this point. IMHO (and some salt), AV1 was just a way to force lower cost to use HEVC.

AVC 10-bit AVC is interesting but again nothing supports it.

Not quite true, UHD Blu-ray disc use HEVC @ 10 bit, 4:2:0. The problem is HDMI 2 does not support this combo so the player must do some conversions. I can post various HDMI charts if needed.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

https://torrentfreak.com/pirates-tau...uality-180419/

This article says hello.

This is what Wendell and I have been trying to tell you for several pages now. There is no interest in higher bit rates, only shaving more and more off the bit rates until content is ‘barely’ HD. Even with 4K, we will be looking at the very smallest file sizes possible. Then, they will go further and shave more off the bit rates. This will be a ongoing thing to the point where you probably don’t even benefit from your 4K tv unless you are feeding that bad boy a proper source such as 4K disc.

I guess you missed the "update" at the end of the article? Posted a day after the article was posted.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by flyry

I guess you missed the "update" at the end of the article? Posted a day after the article was posted.

Irrelevant to the point I was making.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Irrelevant to the point I was making.

Eh not really. Amazon as a digital provider is shit. Their UI is awful and the fact that films have different profiles whether HD or UHD is stupid.

Also every season of a show having its own separate page is dumb too.

I read an article a few weeks back saying they are looking into improving their interface but I wish it was not so cumbersome.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by flyry

Eh not really. Amazon as a digital provider is shit. Their UI is awful and the fact that films have different profiles whether HD or UHD is stupid.

Also every season of a show having its own separate page is dumb too.

I read an article a few weeks back saying they are looking into improving their interface but I wish it was not so cumbersome.

Whether it is Netflix, Amazon or any other service, the aim is the same imo. I stick by that view.

With Amazon, I think they haven’t managed to catch up with Netflix in terms of squeezing the best picture from a poor speed connection.

The interface is awful imo. I agree with you there. The Forward and rewind buttons are hideous to use and the menu interface is completely mince imo.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

It appears you do not have Netflix because if you did you could see the info that I provided a link to in several post back. The first month is free, sign up, go to your account, click Playback Settings then you will see by the High radio button: Best video quality, up to 3GB per hour for HD, 7GB per hour for Ultra HD. It is not old, outdated or from some long forgotten web site, it is on the official Netflix site. It is there for any Netflix sub to see.

I believe you about Netflix Bitrates, but other 4K Providers especially Sony Ultra I'm sure their Bitrates are higher. I just don't have any Links to prove it, only that they highly recommend at least 25Mbps. It was either Amazon or Netflix, and I went with Amazon we all have to cut cost somewhere.

What comes into play now are CDN (Content Delivery Networks,) that Streaming Providers use. The cost of this Bandwidth will play a big part.

[Vilya]

^The latest information I can find is from rtings.com in this June 2017 article. Sony Ultra streams at 16 Mbps, same as almost everyone else. There is nothing special about them. Netflix also streams at 16 Mbps (for 4K) and they likewise recommend an internet connection with at least 25 Mbps. Streaming service providers routinely recommend an internet service that can deliver download speeds that are about 56% higher, or more, than the maximum streaming bitrates they provide. Streaming service bitrate x 1.56= minimum recommended internet speed.

Netflix and Sony Ultra both recommend an internet speed of at least 25 Mbps because they both stream at 16 Mbps. Same internet recommendation for the same streaming bitrates. If Sony Ultra streamed at a higher bitrate than Netflix, they would then recommend a higher internet speed than does Netflix. Sony Ultra does not recommend a higher internet speed because both Netflix and Sony Ultra offer the same bitrates.

https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/wher...es-and-content

If there was newer information about any of these streaming service's bitrates, someone would have published them. As they apparently haven't, the likely conclusion is that nothing has changed. No need to update the article when there is nothing new to report; rtings.com is usually pretty good at staying current with their information. Bitrates have not gone up, nor have they gone down , for the services listed since the article was published.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Vilya

No need to update the article when there is nothing new to report; rtings.com is usually pretty good at staying current with their information. Bitrates have not gone up, nor have they gone down , for the services listed since the article was published.

About the only thing I saw was in reference to the Sony FMP-X10, Sony shut down their servers last December so you can no longer rent or purchase titles for the X10. Folks say they can still play their previous purchases. Glad I sold mine sometime back .

Sony still list the X10 for sale on their site .

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

About the only thing I saw was in reference to the Sony FMP-X10, Sony shut down their servers last December so you can no longer rent or purchase titles for the X10. Folks say they can still play their previous purchases. Glad I sold mine sometime back .

Sony still list the X10 for sale on their site .

Good call on selling that while you still could. $699 for what amounts to nothing more than a proprietary hard drive was ridiculous, IMO.