Linus said on WAN show that 30fps is preferred over 60fps among LTT viewers. Is that true?

[ARikozuM]

Couldn't care less. 

[Roswell]

3 hours ago, amdorintel said:

Wikipedia is supringsly wrong many times!

Can you provide any examples of 60Hz feature films?

[vanished]

35 minutes ago, Vitamanic said:

Can you provide any examples of 60Hz feature films?

I've heard that Gemini Man is done at 120 fps, I really want to see that just for the tech even though it's apparently mediocre at best.  I saw both Avatar and The Hobbit in 48 fps and quite liked the smoothness, I can't imagine what 120 would be like.  Movies always feel smoother than games at an equivalent speed because (I think) of realistic motion blur, so it should be quite a thing.

[Ashleyyyy]

i much prefer 60fps. doesn't matter what content. 

[flashiling]

things like F1 would be lovely to watch at 144 fps.

but that's just because the cars are going at 340km/h

[yolosnail]

Maybe if YouTube actually gave you the option to choose between 30p and 60p!

My Fire TV simply can't handle 1080p60 playback smoothly (constant stuttering) so I have to play back at 720p60 which is a noticeable downgrade

 

I honestly don't care what frame rate things are uploaded in, to me it's more about the content than the frame rate (or even resolution for that matter!)

I'd rather watch a Gamers Nexus video in 144p15 than an LTT video in 4K60

 

If you're the sort of person that comments on a video crying because it's not 60fps, then can you please record a 60fps video of you getting the f**k over yourself please

[RasmusDC]

i prefer 60 hz when watching game streams, i prefer 30 hz when watching broadcast, the soap opera effect for me is simply too pronounced, i do know that this might be a left over from many years of watching cinematic 24fps. 

 

but that is just how my eyes react.

 

things look cheap in 60hz, there is no doubt that big large panoramic shoots with movement are way more "non blurry" when running higher refresh, but the hyper realisme sometimes just don´t do anything good..

 

i also guess that Linus having filmic geeks like brandon hired, will ensure focus on "cinematic" recording settings.

 

still i don´t really see LTT as something with broadcast quality, they still seem to struggle a lot with quality, compared to f.ex. Marquees or even Unboxing theory... there is a potential for doing so much better. 

[akio123008]

I love watching high framerate content, but I'd like to point out that on the production side there can be good reasons to prefer lower framerates, such as the ability to film in lower light conditions, data reduction etc. It's because of this that a certain creator may be able to deliver better quality (crisper video, less noise, nicer colours) at lower framerates and therefore opt for a lower framerate, in which case I do prefer low framerate content. I don't think this goes for LMG, but for smaller creators it can be a thing.

[Bramimond]

People preferring lower framerates remind me of people preferring their food burned, because that's how their mother made it and it gives them that special feeling of nostalgia and a homely cooked meal if their food is burned.

 

This becomes even more obvious if they then go around and say "but gaming needs to be 60Hz". It's the same for movie grain. People just got used to an inferior product. It was probably the same for people growing up with black and white movies. I can just imagine them complaining about how color in movies is just wrong.

[Ben17]

i really don't mind if its 30hz or 60hz 

[Musty]

If I was forced to choose I would go for 30fps, but the poll really needs a don't care option. I'd imagine that is the realistic majority answer... 

[Ed Edd and Eddy]

No one needs more than 30fps for video.

 

gameplay is another story though 

[Kisai]

On 11/4/2019 at 6:57 PM, poochyena said:

I prefer all videos at 60fps, but curious if linus is right that most prefer 30fps

It really depends, because there's this thing called "Soap opera effect" (basically when TV shows are filmed and broadcast at 480i60 instead of converted to 480i60 3:2 pulldown) that drives people absolutely bonkers. Most Film and TV "intended to have a cinematic look" is 24fps, no exception. The problem here is that youtube is not cinematic. All digital video has no need to do 3:2 pulldown at the video file/stream level and is instead done at the player level. This creates a much more efficient file/stream size since you're not duplicating frames for the sake of the monitor. When monitors starting being able to exceed 60hz this was even more beneficial since now they could interpolate even more frames.

 

But, people do not like the soap opera effect. When a 1080i60/p24 source becomes 90/100/120/144/240p etc people are rightfully agitated because it now doesn't look like film, it looks like it was a TV or home camcorder source. 

 

Now most youtube video from a camcorder/smartphone is particularly rubbish at 60fps because most CMOS cameras do not have global shutters, so fast movements made with rolling shutters look like jello. 

 

If people are actually selecting 30, or they're just running "auto" and it's picking 30, I'd say it's the latter. Click "stats for nerds" on most youtube videos while you have it on auto, even if it's HD, and you'll notice it runs at 1920x1080p30 and there is NO option for p60.

 

[Jae Tee]

I use 1080p @60fps just because its available to me.

 

Still waiting for 1440p

[Kisai]

16 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

https://www.businessinsider.com/the-hobbit-causing-nausea-and-dizziness-2012-12 apparently the higher frame rate of the hobbit made some people nauseous. idk because i didnt even notice it when i watched the hobbit 

I'm someone that's affected by motion sickness rather easily, and it's kinda one of those things you have to get used to. I didn't get sick from the hobbit, but I only watched one of those films in the theater, and I can tell you for sure it did not improve the experience.

 

If every film was shot in 48fps or 60fps or 120fps, it would only make it worse because the brain goes from "yeah this isn't real, but it looks like motion" to "holy **** we're going to die" because it now receives stimulus that makes it believe it's moving.

 

Something similar happened the first time I watched an IMAX film, and it made me horribly dizzy, but that might also have been because it was the Science world screen in Vancouver which is not the same as IMAX screens anywhere else. It's just higher resolution and when 4K stuff started coming out, that stopped being a big deal.

[poochyena]

5 hours ago, Bramimond said:

People preferring lower framerates remind me of people preferring their food burned, because that's how their mother made it and it gives them that special feeling of nostalgia and a homely cooked meal if their food is burned.

 

This becomes even more obvious if they then go around and say "but gaming needs to be 60Hz". It's the same for movie grain. People just got used to an inferior product. It was probably the same for people growing up with black and white movies. I can just imagine them complaining about how color in movies is just wrong.

Yea, I think a lot of people here are forgetting the same arguments are used by console gamers about 30 vs 60 fps games. 30fps games is good enough and 60fps just makes them motion sick.

 

[spartaman64]

25 minutes ago, poochyena said:

Yea, I think a lot of people here are forgetting the same arguments are used by console gamers about 30 vs 60 fps games. 30fps games is good enough and 60fps just makes them motion sick.

 

Except in this case it actually doesn't really make a difference. I didn't know the hobbit was shot in higher fps and I didn't notice it. And there are some games where it doesn't make a difference either like do I care if my clannad visual novel is at 30fps or 9000 fps not really or my pokemon platinum

[dalekphalm]

18 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

i hope thats not the last airbender avatar

No - James Cameron's Avatar 2 (as in, Pandora, blue aliens, etc).

18 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

https://www.businessinsider.com/the-hobbit-causing-nausea-and-dizziness-2012-12 apparently the higher frame rate of the hobbit made some people nauseous. idk because i didnt even notice it when i watched the hobbit 

Did you actually watch the Hobbit in 48 FPS HFR? Most theatres showed it in standard 24 FPS - you had to go to a specific screening that advertised the HFR feature.

8 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I've heard that Gemini Man is done at 120 fps, I really want to see that just for the tech even though it's apparently mediocre at best.  I saw both Avatar and The Hobbit in 48 fps and quite liked the smoothness, I can't imagine what 120 would be like.  Movies always feel smoother than games at an equivalent speed because (I think) of realistic motion blur, so it should be quite a thing.

Yeah Gemini Man was filmed in 120 FPS 4K 3D - it's frankly a groundbreaking technological advancement. I haven't seen it yet (and no theatre in the world is capable of native playback). I think some AMC theatres in the states are showing it in 2K at 120 FPS (probably non-3D, I don't recall) - some Canadian ones are showing it in 60 FPS.

9 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

Except in this case it actually doesn't really make a difference. I didn't know the hobbit was shot in higher fps and I didn't notice it. And there are some games where it doesn't make a difference either like do I care if my clannad visual novel is at 30fps or 9000 fps not really or my pokemon platinum

Based on the fact that you didn't notice, you probably saw it in standard 24 FPS - I got used to it very quickly, but it was very obvious to me.

[amdorintel]

There are way to many movie theatre types now.

IMAX

DBOX

REAL 3D

ATMOS

ULTRA AVX

 

How does the average dude choose between all those options?

[dalekphalm]

1 hour ago, amdorintel said:

There are way to many movie theatre types now.

IMAX

DBOX

REAL 3D

ATMOS

ULTRA AVX

 

How does the average dude choose between all those options?

I can break some of it down:

DBOX is motion controlled seats. They can be found in different theatre types (eg; UltraAVX)

REAL 3D just means it’s 3D and uses that tech - can be in any theatre type (incl imax)

 

ATMOS is sound tech and can be found in any theatre type. 
 

IMAX and UltraAVX are types of theatres (IMAX has various sub types incl 70mm film, Laser 3D, etc). UltraAVX is a competitor to IMAX and is like the “upgraded image/sound quality”. 
 

I believe UltraAVX is a Cineplex exclusive brand. 

[mr moose]

I don't why people argue over this, real tech enthusiast watch all their content in 56ohms.

[LAwLz]

I was insulted by the claim "everyone" in LTTs audience couldn't tell the difference when Linus uploaded a fake 60 FPS video.

Linus first uploaded a fake 60 FPS video which was just 30 FPS doubled. Afterwards he uploaded a real 60 FPS video, but when he did that people in his audience assumed it was another fake video. I called BS on the second video being 30 FPS doubled, and I was right. Wanna know how I was right? Because the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS is noticeable as fuck. There were multiple other people in the same thread going "no way this is 30 FPS, this is too smooth" even when other people said it was fake 60 FPS.

 

 

 

 

On 1/26/2015 at 4:27 PM, LAwLz said:

Yep it looks smoother to me too. I am going to do a blind test right now and report the results but I can already tell that YouTube heavily favors the 60 FPS version in terms of bit rate.

 

30 FPS - 2860 Kbps

60 FPS - 5457 Kbps

 

 

Edit:

Right now, I don't believe for a second that the 60 FPS video is just a 30 FPS video displaying each frame twice, because it looks a lot smoother. I think there are three possibilities.

1) I am experiencing placebo, which is weird because I thought the video looked weird and for that reason I checked the settings. If the video really was 2:1 in terms of frames with the 30 FPS video then I shouldn't have been suspicious to begin with.

 

2) Linus is full of shit and just wants to go "gotcha!" on his audience. Maybe it is a double bluff to see which people just blindly listens to him without looking into things. "This does look smoother but Linus says it shouldn't so I better just parrot him!".

 

3) The video really is higher frame rate. Maybe the program Linus used to render the video did some frame interpolation or something.

 

On 1/26/2015 at 4:57 PM, LAwLz said:

Blind test is done. My brother chose a video while I was looking away, I guessed if it was 30 or 60, and then we repeated the process 10 times.

I had 100% accuracy and I could tell within seconds.

 

I am 100% sure that the 60 FPS video linked earlier (the wine rack) is truly 60 FPS. I have no idea why Linus said that it wasn't on the WAN show because he is just wrong and I can prove it.

[CreativeName6426]

It all depends on the internet I on. If it's fast enough, I'd rather have 60 fps, if its slower, I'd rather have 30 to minimize buffering.

[heIly]

On 11/5/2019 at 3:21 AM, RejZoR said:

I always look funny at people who say they hate the "soap opera" feel when watching 60fps movies. Bitch, that's how high framerate view looks like. You're just not used to it because you watch crappy 24fps or 30fps video all your miserable life. Just saying.

soap operas are filmed at 24fps. they look the way they do due to lighting, medium filmed on, and extremely quick turnaround rate. as in, they're filmed, and edited, the very same day they're aired. 

 

so no, the "soap opera" effect isn't caused by 60fps, it's frame interpolation, to make it seem better than it really is.

 

 

[amdorintel]

i think they would take more time on getting things right for soaps, its big business