8 ms·
Mostly it's just because the standards say so. There's nothing about how MPEG-2 works that inherently makes it impossible to encode 4K video with it, the standa
by opencl 7y ago
Mostly it's just because the standards say so. There's nothing about how MPEG-2 works that inherently makes it impossible to encode 4K video with it, the standard just says that MPEG-2 video shall not exceed 80Mbit/s, 1920 horizontal pixels, 1152 vertical pixels, or 62,668,800 luminance samples per second.
The limits are just there for interoperability. As is, if you encode a video that complies with MPEG-2 High Level, then you can be pretty confident that any MPEG-2 High Level decoder will decode it.
Without the limit everything becomes a mess. You're writing a decoder, what max res should you support? 4K? 8K? The people writing decoders don't agree and then people trying to distribute these high resolution files find that they work in some decoders but not others.
- mehrdadn 7y agoThanks! What do you mean by "not being able to decode" something though? Do you mean time-wise (not enough bandwidth to keep up) or do you mean the algorithm would fail in a different way? The latter doesn't make sense to me, and the former seems like it's entirely system-dependent? Like isn't it the exact same problem if I have an underpowered computer?
- Wowfunhappy 7y agoIt means hardware decoders won't be able to decode the videos. (Some software decoders that are overly rigid about following the spec may refuse as well, but most won't, and none actually have to from my understanding.) You can absolutely use h.264 to encode 8K@120fps if you want to.
- mehrdadn 7y agoOhh hardware decoders! Makes sense.