I only download, and I want the best possible quality. Always download the maximum bitrate, 100, 144 GB files.... And I am not rich. In my country for 50 euros a month you have 300 Mbps connection with no download limits. And hard drives of several TB are not too expensive.

But I'm not a hoarder either. I only watch (download) around 10 or 12 movies a week at SLR. And I don't store all of them.

So I vote to keep the 100+ GB files with max bitrate.

    Rakly3 You already implemented an option for download-only versions of your videos, which are not used in the streaming environment. So all you would need to add at this point is a second file alongside the extremely large original version, which is also download-only. The streaming part of SLR wouldn't be affected at all by that option.

    Your explanations about the streaming limitations are all understandable, but they don't explain why it's not possible to offer a second download-only option. The reason why this doesn't happen can only be guessed from between the lines and from the company's general behavior/direction.

    Why can't the reason be spelled out straightforwardly to create a reasonable basis for conversation about possible solutions, like a higher tier subscription for download users?

      Natch
      Nobody said that these shouldn't be available anymore.

      This thread is about an additional(!) download option.

        LordCrash You could even provide file servers only for your own SLRO scenes, you know. But I also understand that this is not really something you want to provide since it will also cost some money.

        We actually had slroriginals.com until recently, but it closed a month or three ago and merged here.

        LordCrash I can't imagine that this would require a lot of effort or cost a lot of money.

        It's like running a farm of crypto mining rigs. But with graphic cards of $15k each. A decked-out encoding server would cost you about $150k to $200k each. Video encoding is probably the largest expense for most studios.

        But we are building other stuff to enhance quality and experience, pushing innovation. A very big chunk of SLR is VR-R&D

              Rakly3 Hm, sounds like a bigger investment than I expected...sigh... 😵‍💫

              But well, in the end, it's still common knowledge that 30 mbps is not enough for 4k 60 fps videos for the best possible outcome. So something has to change sooner or later.

              At least I still hope that one day we'll get to see a better bitrate. Personally, I don't care that much about other gimmicks. Video quality is all that counts for me - besides the content itself, of course.

                Rakly3 How do you need a server for $150k-$200k to encode a smaller version of the SLR-Original videos every 2-3 days, when a simple Mac Book can handle 8k60 to 8k60 H.265 Main 10 encoding with 40fps, like shown in this video:

                https://youtu.be/d0ybV0OFFaE?t=866

                With a new video every 2-3 days even much higher quality settings shouldn't be a problem, without requiring a server farm or $15.000 graphic cards.

                You could even outsource the task. I'm sure you find someone who would download the original and send you back the smaller version for a very reasonable price.

                    spacepirate Yes, but we are talking specifically about the SLR Originals here. Videos from most other studios already are available in higher bitrates or have much smaller "original" files (only RealJamVR has a similar problem) - they don't need a second download option.

                    So the extra effort is relatively small - no matter if you toss it on top of the existing solution or use a separate workstation for it. Having to use a separate $2000 workstation would already be the worst case.

                      spacepirate This, and we also encode multiple versions per scene.
                      It all has to fit in the pipeline. We're not sitting here inputting every single encode manually in Handbreak. Much of the encoding is also done on CPU with the x265 library because it has better results, but is a lot slower.[1] - You can check any studio's files, they all use CPU encoding. (this doesn't mean GPU's are not needed or used.). You're also dealing with files that can be several terabytes large. GPU's with 8 or 16 GB mem are not enough.

                      [1] If you have k-lite codec pack installed on your system, you likely have mediainfo too. Right click a file and select Mediainfo.

                      The RAW versions I use for scripting already are about 300GB for 40 minutes at only 1080x1080
                      If any scripter is reading this, protip, using RAW YUV gives you real-time forward AND backward scrubbing in OFS and JFS. - No waiting required.

                          Rakly3 Yeah, but in the end it would still be only one additional encoding only for the SLRO scenes. So indeed we're only speaking about 2-3 scenes each week.

                              LordCrash I understand what you are saying, really. But it's not going to happen, at least not at this stage. It's a lot more productive to focus our efforts in using newer technologies and ways of doing things. Which we are! But NDA 😉

                                LordCrash Had to think of this thread when I saw this. (youtube link below)
                                The part I'm talking about is, "streaming 4K is very expensive and difficult."
                                Though correct, it would be more correct if he would have said high bitrates. It really makes a big difference whether you are using a streaming platform vs a fileserver (downloads).

                                The internet as a whole is too slow for high bitrate streaming at this point. And I can't stress enough we are talking about actual streaming services. If you stream from a fileserver, then you are still 'just' downloading the whole file. This would be not feasible for a streaming server to send the whole file to everyone watching a stream.

                                This of course requires a lot more server resources and management to accomplish.

                                They also go on about why some people have good connections, and others have bad connections from the same service. Even if both users are practically Neighbours.

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltyntSIVsjA&t=676s

                                    Rakly3
                                    Hm, how about offering an additional fileserver for SLRO downloads then? I get that you need streaming servers for all the streaming but that doesn't mean that you couldn't establish a fileserver only for your own scenes (SLRO).

                                    I'm honest with you, SLRO scenes are at least 50% of the reason why I'm here and I guess I'm not the only one. It's far more important than you might think. Netflix and Amazon etc. know that their original content is essential for their streaming platform and they do offer the best possible quality and extras for their very own content. Amazon for examples streams 4k content with Dolby Atmos sound etc. Yes, it costs more. But that's the stuff that people actually subscribe for. All the additional 3rd party content is just "goodies" for quite a few people. Same is true for SLR. So you should offer the best possible experience for your SLRO scenes, maybe more than you offer for 3rd party content.

                                        LordCrash 💯 Originals are 75% of the value proposition for me, and have already differentiated SLR from other studios (harem scenes for example). I think it’s very important to treat the SLRO releases with extra tender loving care. We’re not the only ones brought in by (1) Original releases (2) perhaps 20% of the other content, while (3) trying to ignore the tsunami of all the rest which is mostly garbage, and should absolutely not be treated on par with originals.

                                          Rakly3 Bitrate isn't everything, but I doubt any major studio uses completely unsuitable settings like shown in the video with the H264 3500Kbps Fast Option.

                                          There should be minor differences, because all larger studios have people that know what they are doing at least to a certain degree. So If we compare SLR with other Top 10 studios, your settings can't save 50% bitrate just by using better settings. In the best case I would expect 10% difference between Top 10 studios.

                                          After all, SLR doesn't use tuned settings for each scene, but rather a general scheme - if each scene was optimized individually, particularly low values would certainly be possible in some cases, but when everything is around 30Mbps, such manual tuning apparently doesn't take place.

                                            Rakly3 This illustrates perfectly what I'm talking about when I say bitrate isn't everything. Your encoding settings matter a lot too! You can keep the same bitrate while increasing quality.

                                            slr is using x265 slow preset already. you could use a slower preset but that would significantly increase encoding times for little additional quality benefit. so with that context bitrate is everything. unless slr is going to start encoding with av1...? that doesnt seem likely right now given that accelerated av1 decoding isnt widely supported...