• Feature Request

  • Can SLR offer a higher quality h265 option for 5k/6k? (currently it is 21Mbps)

As a new member on SLR that has a Reverb G2 on preorder on I also support this idea. I have shitty speeds due to my crappy ISP service and for me to download 30-40 gb files would take 4-6 hours so unless I start the download before going to bed it is not practical.

g2kbuffetboy

Current bitrates are tuned for streaming, setting anything higher than that might infer streaming lags.
120 mbit/s is really justified with k2 and 6K videos, since they are also 60fps oppose to K1's where those were 30 most of the time. But more bitrate is allocated to the actual information in fisheye since we aren't blowing out the top and bottom with equirect transformation.

TLDR: 120 mbit is a safe margin where we don't get any compression for Original. 20mbit is a safe margin where users can stream with stuttering

Edit: you should not see any degradable quality in lower bitrate file. If you can spot it, please provide the screenshots and I'll take it from there.
TLDR2: if you can't find a difference don't waste time/money/traffic downloading original 😉

      Philip Thanks for responding, Philip. I appreciate that we already got 2 SLR reps looking at this thread =).

      I totally understand about keeping 21Mbps for the streaming option. And I agree that 120 Mbps is solid for Original files.

      Philip you should not see any degradable quality in lower bitrate file. If you can spot it, please provide the screenshots and I'll take it from there.
      TLDR2: if you can't find a difference don't waste time/money/traffic downloading original

      Even before I took these screenshots, I could already tell you that I can 100% tell the difference. Even between 60Mbps and 21Mbps I can tell the difference. That is why previously I always downloaded the 60Mbps SexBabesVR files over the 21Mbps versions. Maybe majority of users cannot tell, but then again, I'm not so sure about that.

      For many years, I watched VR on a Samsung S8 Exynos with GearVR, and I was already clearly able to tell the difference for the SexBabes videos mentioned above. Now that I'm on a RTX 3080 with Pimax 8KX, the difference is even more noticeable.

      Also, everything you see in these screenshots are amplified when viewing through a headset, since VR players zoom in the picture to fill the LCD panels in the headset. So just know that even though the differences are subtle here, when viewing in VR and these images appear inches away from our face, it is definitely noticeable.

      And finally, remember these are just screenshots, so they only tell half the story. When viewing this in motion, the lower bitrate is also even more so degraded (in comparison).

      Album: https://imgur.com/a/yY2nPCB
      (Best way to compare is to open each image in a separate tab and tab back and forth to see the differences)
      (1st picture is Original at 120Mbps. 2nd picture is Rendition at 21Mbps)

      Witcher Ex 1
      Notice the bumps on Whitney's forehead area, her eyes, and nose, etc.
      (Original)

      (Rendition)

      Naughty Dorm Ex 1
      Same with this, look at Melody's facial features, and skin textures.
      (Original)

      (Rendition)

      Naughty Dorm Ex 2
      This one is really obvious when looking at Melody's face.
      (Original)

      (Rendition)

      Naughty Dorm Ex 3
      Compare Kenzie's and Melody's faces between the two images. The detail is crystal clear in the Original and very soft on the Rendition.
      (Original)

      (Rendition)

      So yeah, to me, it is a very big difference especially since closeups are so important in VR. And I just want to reiterate, I noticed the differences between the two versions even before the screenshots. I remember the first time I downloaded the Witcher scene and the Sofi Ryan scene, I was not happy with how they looked, so I downloaded the Original file to see if there was any improvement and I instantly noticed the difference.

      So, I hope that helps support my point some. I know there are many reasons why you still may not want to offer a higher bitrate, but just know that the end result is definitely impacted.

            2 months later

            Philip Thanks, looking into it

            Hey Philip just want to say thank you. I've noticed the last few SLR Original releases have now upped their highest rendition (aside from Original) to 30 Mbps instead of 21 Mbps.

            Really happy that you all listened to customer feedback and made the improvement. That deserves 4 stars in my book. Please pass on my thanks to everyone involved (the content pipeline team, tech team, etc)

                  Philip But more bitrate is allocated to the actual information in fisheye since we aren't blowing out the top and bottom with equirect transformation.

                  So true! The very first time I saw a VR video clip in 2D (outside of VR) I wondered to myself: "Is this really the best way to project 180 degree video. It can't be!" But since I'm no expert on projections, I just thought that "they" probably know what they're doing. Now I just wonder why the equirect projection ever became so popular for 180 degree video. Any idea?

                  Btw (and this isn't really the correct thread for tihs but...), it seems like you're using different fisheye projections for different cameras? If so, that means we'll get videos with lots of different projections soon, and I'm not sure I like that idea. Can't you reproject all of them into some single standard fisheye projection instead?

                      2 years later

                      g2kbuffetboy high bitrate with 60fps and relatively low bitrate with 90fps which is better ?
                      what l mean is the original one vs 90fps one among the downloading options.

                        gurphh To make them uniform, you'd have to cut them all to the lowest viewing angle lens. Which for some videos would mean a reduction up to 40°, which is a lot. You'd also need to deform them with basicaly the opposite of what Equirect does. Instead of stretching, compressing*, which means removing details.

                        *Here I mean compressing of the visual image, not data compression.

                            Rakly3 When I wrote that post (looong ago...) I was under the impression that the fisheye angle wasn't the only thing that differed between cameras. But if it's jsut the angle, I'm happy.

                                5 months later