3 ms·
Streaming 4K videos (or fitting them onto a 50GB physical disc) requires better video codecs. MPEG2 wouldn't be enough. Personally, I see the benefit in 4K hav
by ozmbie 9y ago
Streaming 4K videos (or fitting them onto a 50GB physical disc) requires better video codecs. MPEG2 wouldn't be enough.
Personally, I see the benefit in 4K having a setup to take advantage of it.
- sitkack 9y agoMost of MPEG2 was focused on interlaced formats. MPEG1 can already handle 4k by 4k video. MPEG1 and 2 can already handle HD on bluray media. Even at the max bitrate (100Mbps), a bluray can store 1.4Hrs of video. One could definitely take parts of MPEG1 and MPEG2 to create a new good enough codec for many use cases.
- izacus 9y ago> One could definitely take parts of MPEG1 and MPEG2 to create a new good enough codec for many use cases. Well people did exactly that - and they named it: - MPEG-4 Part 2 (also known under names like DivX, Xvid, ...) - MPEG-4 Part 11 (also known as AVC, H.264, ...) - VP8 - VP9 - AV1 - MPEG-H Part 2 (also known as HEVC, H.265) Those are all codecs that build on and extend what MPEG-2 is.