5 ms·
"These units are not perfect for quality, however they are not bad at all, Here is a screenshot taken on my laptop..." I am confused by this ... HDMI is a digi
by rsync 10y ago
"These units are not perfect for quality, however they are not bad at all, Here is a screenshot taken on my laptop..."
I am confused by this ... HDMI is a digital interconnect and deals in digital I/O ... in my mind, if you succeed in capturing that HDMI, the resulting stream should be identical ... why would there be a quality (or any other) difference ?
- riskable 10y agoBecause they compress the video before sending it over IP. Nothing fancy, just M-JPEG which is basically the same thing as taking a screenshot of the video every nth of a second and saving it as a high-quality JPEG (probably around 95% quality rating). The screenshot in the video suggests 1000fps but that figure is highly dubious. It is much more likely to be 30 or 60fps on a cheap HDMI->IP converter like this.
- ambrop7 10y ago1000fps, what the hell? HDMI only supports up to 60fps (which makes sense considering the intended use is sending video to a display device like monitor/tv/projector).
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- antoinealb 10y agoRecompression via a lossy algorithm probably
- pjc50 10y agoYou nearly always want the capture device to compress because it's otherwise very hard to handle. 1080p/60/8 HDMI is 4.46Gbps; just about fits in a USB3 or PCIe3 data link, but exceeds most SSDs' write bandwidths.
- brigade 10y ago? Most all half-decent SSDs can saturate a 6Gbps SATA link either direction; that's why they're moving to PCIe. Also, 1920x1080x60x24 is just under 3Gbps; where are you getting 4.46? And even if you wanted to record compressed video, you'd almost certainly get better quality feeding it through other HW encoders if you didn't want to spend CPU time on it.