Bitrate comparison test

Rakly3
I'm honestly interested: Who are these options for?

1. That's the actual "regular file" with max. 30k kbit/s bitrate. I guess the HUUUUUUUGE majority is either streaming this one or downloading it.
2. Who is actually streaming or downloading 6k+ scenes in 4k anymore? According to your own research like 90%+ of your customer base has either a Quest 2 or a better headset that has zero issues rendering the 6k+ file. Why do the few people on Quest 1 or Go get an extra download option but all the people on the major and technically much more advanced headsets have to deal with 30k kbit/s max?
3. Who the fuck downloads h.264 files today? Two people on the planet? Why is this even an option today?
4. It's cool that there is a downloadable raw file but I doubt that it's downloaded a lot. Should imho stay though for the complete enthusiasts on PIMAX etc. or those who want to edit/cut their own video material from the original file.

IMHO you should at least kick 3, rename "max 6k+" to "optimized 6k" (= max. 30k kbit/s for optimizing streaming and smaller download files) and then add a new, actual max. 6k+ option with an ideal bitrate for maximum quality (less than the untouched "original" file with 120k kbit/s or whatever but more than the capped 30k kbit/s file we have right now).

Rakly3

Which should close the debate about bitrate, which is no measure of quality. That's ridiculous.

Seriously, that's apples and oranges. Like 100% apples and oranges.

It's like saying "Bitrate doesn't matter because resolution matters much more".

Well, an 8k picture looks very, very likely more crisp than a 720p picture. No bitrate increase will ever make the 720p more crisp than the 8k picture. So yeah, you're king of right but...

...your statement also misses the whole point though...

The question at hand is not whether something else could be more benefital for picture quality but whether a higher bitrate without changing anything else would result in better quality. And well, yes, it does, especially if you starting bitrate is pretty small.

So no, bitrate is no measure of quality. But a higher bitrate can naturally improve the quality of a live video if you don't change anything else about it.

Rakly3 Let's say our new 6K version = quality-wise, our old 8K version. People are going to be unsubscribing and demanding refunds because they can't use the new 8K stream.

While I understand that argument I don't think that it's a pretty strong one. You could still make the "optimized for streaming 8k version" the standard version for streaming. The option to go for the masses. Or you could offer presets for users so that everybody could choose which version should be standard for them.

I think you use the same flawed logic like some game companies who try to fool people into thinking that their newest PC games couldn't offer the best visual quality because some people with older rigs could be alienated that they couldn't play the game on ultra presets. Which has been proven bollocks so many times in gaming history, it's basically a running joke right now. PC games offer different quality presets and you choose the one that matches your hardware etc. If you want to have better tech, upgrade your tech. Same applies here. If you want to have the best experience, buy the best headset. Invest in the best internet. Or just use an optimized reduced version and be happy with it. There are options for everyone, depends on personal investment and personal circumstances.

ISo really don't get the fear of lost sale here. It's much rather a scapegoat imho.

mirdumar using gifs to highlight the differences isnt good because gifs have a very limited color palette

Rakly3 Increasing the bitrate of our files will not automatically translate into better image quality.

yes it will (unless you intentionally use some stupid settings to increase the bitrate without a corresponding increase in quality)

Rakly3 Changing from
I-B-P-B-I
to
I-P-P-P-I
can increase quality with a smaller increase to bitrate than simply doubling or tripling the bitrate.

b frames have better coding efficiency... especially for vr content. replacing b frames with p frames will increase bitrate requirement to achieve the same quality so chances are that your example would decrease quality compared to if you just kept b frames and increased bitrate.

Rakly3 If we increase our bitrate, then certain users will have to stream the 6K version instead of the 8K version. Because their internet is too slow fo the higher bitrate 8K.

so the majority of customers should suffer with low quality 8k because a few people with dialup speed connections want to stream 8k? makes total sense... btw median internet connection speed in the us (probably slr's biggest market) is way higher than the appallingly low 22 mbps slr is encoding 8k videos at.

spacepirate

using gifs to highlight the differences isnt good because gifs have a very limited color palette

Sorry, it's animated webp, i wrote gif by mistake.

"Funny" how that promising thread ended with a one-liner in another thread with the exact same generalized statement we've already heard so many times before....

doublevr Our great @Sandi_SLR is working on a post outlining the whole bitrate business. I can assure you are going to get surprised

Nobody is actually surprised and now it's not needed anymore. You've already said that you don't care so case closed. Everyone looking for high quality downloads (and streams...) got rected again by SLR. Thanks for nothing.

doublevr Dude, there have already been people that proved your 30mbps compression is chopping out data. also: WHY in the world are you shooting 8k at 200mbps. That's an insanely low bitrate for footage, like crazy low. You should be approaching gbps at 8k. That explains why your video quality is so low. For reference, my cheap old fuji XH1 shoots 200mbps for 4k footage and that in no way is considered a professional camera.

this one comment by you explains so much of the reduced video quality.

doublevr

Streams are actually the best of the best quality.

Bottomline 8k 200mbps is an easy way for editors to get the best downloads quality. Then that file is used to create streaming files by super advanced 30mbps max variable bitrate encodings that takes a week for each video.

These streaming encodings are magic. The quality is on pars with 200mbps original file for most scenes.

hahahhaha, you are trolling us, aren't you?

If not i don't know what to tell you, i already posted two animated webs they clearly show that there is a loss in quality.

Here i reposted one of them again, just look how much detail is lost on her forehead, eyes, under her eyes, nose, and around the nose. hair, lips, basically her whole face.

Comparison is between 8K 30mbps and Original 8K 90mbps. Scene is Aubree Valentine "Consumated Passion" from VRHush.