SchnuppiLilac
I think the move to AV1 is pretty great for all of us, not just those with slow internet.
First off, it's great to see companies adopting royalty-free codec. HEVC licensing has been problematic - for instance, Firefox still struggles with HEVC decoding due to these issues. (https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/hevc-support/idi-p/18643)
While I'm totally fine with the current quality of SLR videos, AV1 opens up some cool possibilities. Even if the quality stays the same, the smaller file sizes mean SLR can store and serve up more content without breaking the bank. That could lead to potentially higher quality options down the line without massive cost increases.
Plus, AV1 generally handles certain types of content better than HEVC, like fast motion or complex scenes. So we might see some improvements even at similar bitrates.
Sure, not everyone needs smaller files for streaming, but it's still a win-win. SLR saves on bandwidth and storage, and that savings could translate to better content or features for us in the future.
Hairsational
You're right to be cautious about quality, but I think there's more to the story here.
The 50% difference you noticed might be a bit misleading due to the specific sample. Different scenes compress differently, and static backgrounds tend to compress really well with AV1.
For a more balanced comparison, check out this outdoor scene where the background isn't static:
AV1 46230_4000p - 464MB
HEVC 46230_4000p - 437MB
As you can see, the file sizes are much closer here, with AV1 being about 6% larger.
AV1 tends to handle complex scenes and motion better than HEVC, so the quality difference might actually be negligible or even slightly better in some cases, despite the smaller file size.
It's also worth noting that encoders are constantly improving, so we might see even better results as AV1 encoding is optimized further.
