3 ms·
Anyone noticed that streaming services start to compromise on quality? With Netflix it's been like that for a while. Apple TV+ seems to be the best. I really wa
by sgt 1y ago
Anyone noticed that streaming services start to compromise on quality? With Netflix it's been like that for a while. Apple TV+ seems to be the best. I really want to get into Blu-ray now, looking for a decent player.
- nullify88 1y agoI mostly see a lot of stuttering. Either during high action scenes or when there's little happening at all. It's especially noticable on HBO / MAX at 4k DV. I assumed it was due to aggressive encoding.
- voxadam 1y agoLife is great on the high seas. I've spent nearly 16 years "Passing the Popcorn" and couldn't be happier.
- pimeys 1y agoSome butter with your popcorn? Here let me pass.
- dmos62 1y agoQuestion: what's the streaming budget for the big platforms? Can they offer 50-100 mbps? For example, a 70 gb video for a 2.5 hour movie would need 67 mbps to stream. Having access to a rip like that for a popular movie (meaning new or classic) is normal "on the high seas" and it has a detectable difference on my budget-tier setup compared to a ~20 gb rip. I'm wondering if streaming platforms can afford to offer something like that.
- russelg 1y agoSony Bravia Core has movies up to 80mbps.
- xienze 1y agoSure, they could. But given that the average consumer really doesn’t care that much about picture quality (DVD _still_ outsells Blu-ray for example), why would they bother? Increased storage and bandwidth costs, for what exactly? To cater to the small group of consumers that have good enough hardware (and eyes) to distinguish/care about 20Mb versus 100Mb? Those people are probably buying physical media anyway.
- dmos62 1y agoIs it self-evident to you that that's not cost-prohibitive with what people pay today?
- inanutshellus 1y agoCapitalism doesn't care whether it's cost-prohibitive. It needs to make extra money or lose money in order to affect change.
- dmos62 1y agoWe're misunderstanding each other. I take what you say to mean that Netflix could offer me unlimited bandwidth for 5 euros a month or whatever they're charging.
- sgt 1y agoHow is the life on the private tracking seas? I mean, I'm asking for a friend.
- sixothree 1y agoI would describe Disney as barely 720p when used in any web browser.
- GCUMstlyHarmls 1y agoThat might be a DRM thing, I know some streamers will only send 720 to Linux x Browser combos.
- foobarbecue 1y agoSeems to vary between shows. Been watching Andor on a good system (LG OLED 4K) and it's spectacular. No compression artifacts or splotchy dark areas.
- foobarbecue 1y agoYeah. I see overcompression on a lot of shows. Dark scenes and star fields tend to make it obvious. Three Body Problem was the worst -- I imagine it would have been consistently visually spectacular if they hadn't compressed it to shit. I've seen it on Apple TV too though-- e.g. really visible on Silo title screens. Love, Death and Robots on Netflix quality was great.
- dmos62 1y agoIn my experience, HDR format makes the most difference. There's a dramatic difference between HDR10 and DV.
- sgt 1y agoAnd sometimes you just hear it. They compromise on everything, and a lot of people won't complain if the audio quality is low.
- dylan604 1y agoWe actually had the opposite idea, where we'd steal a few kbps from the video to increase the audio. If you hear poorly compressed audio, the video feels bad too. Hearing clean audio made the video feel better. However, this was way back in the early days where 700kbps total bitrate were on the high end pre-AAC
- myself248 1y agoDisney's Coco did it for me. There were so many scenes with so much visual detail, streaming compression absolutely wrecked it. I've seen it on Blu-ray since and it's an entirely different experience. How they allowed the release to streaming without manually adjusting the compression for those scenes, I don't understand, but someone was slacking.
- theshrike79 1y agoThey all give you "4k", but ATV+ has by far the best bit rate.
- hudo 1y agoNetflix is "4K Ultra HD: Up to 7 GB per hour". Blu ray is 25GB per side, so max 50GB for 2 layers. Typical movies are 35-50GB. So, BR, and think even DVD still looks much better than any streaming service!
- criddell 1y agoSony’s streaming service is 80 Mbps or 36 GB per hour. We’re going to have to disagree about DVDs though. They look awful on modern (big) televisions.
- alias_neo 1y ago> Blu ray is 25GB per side, so max 50GB for 2 layers Are pressed Blu-Rays limited compared to writeable ones? I have 100GB BDXL blanks (single-sided) I use as one of the archives for my family photos/videos. Couldn't a film BluRay also be 100GB on a single side?
- voxadam 1y agoPlenty of movies have been released on BD100. Very out of date list: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=294596 https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=294596 On a site that I am a member of there are nearly 1300 BD100 rips available.
- sgt 1y agoA lot more practical than having to deal with physical media. I'd even pay them for it, to have that kind of premium access.
- alias_neo 1y agoInteresting. I was looking back at my BluRay collection (physical) the other day, looking for a UHD movie to test with, and in my memory, all BDs with UHD, but to my surprise, very few of them were actually UHD, with most just being HD (1080p). I doubt there's in in my collection that are BD100; could I even play them? Currently using a PS5 as my BD player, and PS4 and PS3 before that.