Linus said "... and what do we get for it? 8k videos that nobody can watch because they don't have 8k displayes"

[ZFSinmylungs]

From the video title: This Camera Costs HOW MUCH?! - 8K RED Weapon Unboxing, HOLY $H!T Ep. 17
Well.. even if they had it - YouTube compresses shit anyways, like just look at someone who made a video uploading it over and over from YouTube.. it gets reaaally degraded, unwatchable by each pass.
Is 8K even supported on YouTube?
Why does not Linus make his own YouTube-style website, for the true 8K experiences that people can have.. if they do get a 4k/8k monitor?
If I were to make such a website - I'd not compress videos/audios AT ALL.. I like the original quality of stuff, webm container preferred.
Like I'm just wondering - they already have all of those videos stored, right? I am not sure how much CPU/RAM that would require.. but definitely A LOT of internet bandwidth.

P.S. Linus, you could swear however much you want in those videos - you own them and their distribution xD.
P.S.S. I am not complaining, I am happy I get shit for free, this is just a general theory talking lol

[adarw]

1 minute ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

From the video title: This Camera Costs HOW MUCH?! - 8K RED Weapon Unboxing, HOLY $H!T Ep. 17
Well.. even if they had it - YouTube compresses shit anyways, like just look at someone who made a video uploading it over and over from YouTube.. it gets reaaally degraded, unwatchable by each pass.
Is 8K even supported on YouTube?
Why does not Linus make his own YouTube-style website, for the true 8K experiences that people can have.. if they do get a 4k/8k monitor?
If I were to make such a website - I'd not compress videos/audios AT ALL.. I like the original quality of stuff, webm container preferred.
Like I'm just wondering - they already have all of those videos stored, right? I am not sure how much CPU/RAM that would require.. but definitely A LOT of internet bandwidth.

P.S. Linus, you could swear however much you want in those videos - you own them and their distribution xD.
P.S.S. I am not complaining, I am happy I get shit for free, this is just a general theory talking lol

there is floatplane but you gotta pay for that

[ZFSinmylungs]

@adarw
" there is floatplane but you gotta pay for that "
There's also PeerTube and that other thing.. what's your point? Most of those compress/remux/re-encode stuff, which brings down the quality. Also PeerTube seems to either not support webm or most people just use the shitty mp4 format :/

[Chris Pratt]

6 minutes ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

Why does not Linus make his own YouTube-style website,

He did, technically. It's call Floatplane. It supports up to 4K only, though. There's just no point to 8K, period. It's true that no real device supports it, at least any real device normal people are likely to have. Worse, though, it takes a crap ton of bandwidth. This is why YouTube doesn't do it. It's far too expensive to pay for that kind of bandwidth, especially for streaming.

 

Linus was mostly joking about the 8K camera. People use those types of cameras not to actually do 8K content, but to provide high quality source that can be manipulated,.cropped, etc, while still delivering 4K or even 1080p content.

[tikker]

7 minutes ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

Is 8K even supported on YouTube?

Limited 8k support was added to the AndroidTV version end of last year.

7 minutes ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

Why does not Linus make his own YouTube-style website, for the true 8K experiences that people can have.. if they do get a 4k/8k monitor?

They launched Floatplane. Granted, I don't think it offers 8k, but still they did launch their own video platform.

7 minutes ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

If I were to make such a website - I'd not compress videos/audios AT ALL.. I like the original quality of stuff, webm container preferred.

Do you have any idea of the storage requirements that would have? There's good reason why YouTube has to compress everything to hell, least of which is the bandwidth required to transfer it to you. Most people are likely still on 100 Mbps or slower. For reference, my UHD Blu-ray movie rips are somewhere around 70 GB typically with an average bitrate just shy of 100 Mbps.

[ZFSinmylungs]

@Chris Pratt
That's quite some information there, thank you. Yeah.. while I only have a 1080p monitor currently myself - I do "buy" 4k movies in an attempt to somewhat future-proof.
While we do not currently see any benefits of 8k - we sure will in the near future ;) trust me.

@tikker
Like Chris above said "They launched Floatplane. Granted, I don't think it offers 8k, but still they did launch their own video platform"
wait, so Linus like founded it?

"Do you have any idea of the storage requirements that would have? There's good reason why YouTube has to compress everything to hell, least of which is the bandwidth required to transfer it to you. Most people are likely still on 100 Mbps or slower. "
Yeah, I do. I am about to start investing into storage medias for storing 4k content myself :)
And don't forget that shit ain't chip UGHM paying where I live is low soooo yeah - imagine it being expensive to you... and double that - that's how it is for me :'D.
"Compress everything to hell" - that just fucks with the originality of files.. ew, disgusting
About the bandwidth.. yeah you might be right xD that's why I wait my videos to load at least a minute first xD (not even 1440p)

[tkitch]

@Chris Pratt @tikker since the tags there failed.

 

No, not soon.  4K hasn't even hit ubiquity yet.  8K isn't useful yet in any reasonable format.  Even netflix's crazy compressed 4K streams are 25mbps.  That would put 8K at over 100mbps, which is hard for most people to do.

 

Also, if you consider pixel densities, 8K won't be useful in any TV that's under the size of "gigantic".

 

a 40" 4K has a view distance of under 6' to see the difference.  That means an 80" 8K would have the same sub-6' viewing distance.  So for a more reasonable distance, that's a 100" + Television.  Which is out of any normal pricerange for consumers, and will be for more than a few years to come.

 

Yes, Linus and Luke are the brainchildren behind Floatplane, and did the bulk of the work (with supporting staff, obviously) to create it.

 

 

[TempestCatto]

The real reason for such a high quality camera is that you can zoom in on your subject for more of a headshot effect and them zoom back out. This gives the impression that a talking head is multi camed. It adds to an otherwise boring video of a person talking. Gives depth to the whole thing. With an 8k camera they can easily zoom in on the person talking, or anything really, and you won't notice a loss in quality, especially if watching in 1080p or even 1440p. That is to say, they digitally zoom in during post production, not using the lens to zoom.

[LogicalDrm]

Floatplane offers up to 4K. Though since it's not limited by YT compression, the 1080p on Floatplane is like 4K on YouTube...

[adarw]

3 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

Floatplane offers up to 4K. Though since it's not limited by YT compression, the 1080p on Floatplane is like 4K on YouTube...

wait so if i have a bad screen, should i increase the resolution since youtube isnt that great?

[Chris Pratt]

30 minutes ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

That's quite some information there, thank you. Yeah.. while I only have a 1080p monitor currently myself - I do "buy" 4k movies in an attempt to somewhat future-proof.
While we do not currently see any benefits of 8k - we sure will in the near future trust me.

Not so sure. 8K is just the next big thing for TV manufacturers, because they always have to have a next big thing, and there's no really anything else. They tried 3D. They've already done 4K. They're pushing HDR now.

 

We haven't even caught up to 4K yet. Aside from UHD blu-ray, there's no true 4K content. Even streamed content, what little there is, advertised as 4K is not really 4K. Most people couldn't stream true 4K anyways. Even if you have the bandwidth for it, which in the U.S. is anything but a given, data caps make it untenable. By the time 8K is actually useful, we might be using holographic displays or something. Surprising at it may seem, that tech is actually progressing faster than 8K adoption ever will.

 

There's also downsides to just having higher resolution displays without the content to match. If you've ever watched an old SD show on a new 4K TV, you're well aware it looks like hot garbage. 8K would do the same to 1080p content, which is vast majority of the content available.

[LogicalDrm]

7 minutes ago, adarw said:

wait so if i have a bad screen, should i increase the resolution since youtube isnt that great?

??? It's compressed regardless. Why would your screen quality matter?

[adarw]

Just now, LogicalDrm said:

??? It's compressed regardless. Why would your screen quality matter?

so if i had a 1080p screen what kind of resolution would you put on youtube?

[Kuppi]

1 minute ago, adarw said:

so if i had a 1080p screen what kind of resolution would you put on youtube?

the best your connection can handle. 4k looks better than 1080p even on a 1080p screen because of the much higher bitrate.

[tikker]

36 minutes ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

"Do you have any idea of the storage requirements that would have? There's good reason why YouTube has to compress everything to hell, least of which is the bandwidth required to transfer it to you. Most people are likely still on 100 Mbps or slower. "
Yeah, I do. I am about to start investing into storage medias for storing 4k content myself
And don't forget that shit ain't chip UGHM paying where I live is low soooo yeah - imagine it being expensive to you... and double that - that's how it is for me :'D.
"Compress everything to hell" - that just fucks with the originality of files.. ew, disgusting
About the bandwidth.. yeah you might be right xD that's why I wait my videos to load at least a minute first xD (not even 1440p)

Storing 4k media at home is still miles away from a service like YT offering that. Apparently 500 hours worth of videos is uploaded to YouTube every minute. Let's imagine that is Blu-ray quality UHD video at 80 Mbps (=10 MB/s). That would be10 MB/s * 3600 s / h * 500 h uploaded per minute which is 18,000,000 MB / min. = 18 TB / min. At 1440 min. / day that is 25.9 PB / day worth of content that you would need to process and store.

[kucharczykt]

35 minutes ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

From the video title: This Camera Costs HOW MUCH?! - 8K RED Weapon Unboxing, HOLY $H!T Ep. 17
Well.. even if they had it - YouTube compresses shit anyways, like just look at someone who made a video uploading it over and over from YouTube.. it gets reaaally degraded, unwatchable by each pass.
Is 8K even supported on YouTube?
Why does not Linus make his own YouTube-style website, for the true 8K experiences that people can have.. if they do get a 4k/8k monitor?
If I were to make such a website - I'd not compress videos/audios AT ALL.. I like the original quality of stuff, webm container preferred.
Like I'm just wondering - they already have all of those videos stored, right? I am not sure how much CPU/RAM that would require.. but definitely A LOT of internet bandwidth.

P.S. Linus, you could swear however much you want in those videos - you own them and their distribution xD.
P.S.S. I am not complaining, I am happy I get shit for free, this is just a general theory talking lol

I think one of the reasons that ltt shoots with 8k and higher res. cameras is so they can crop the frame in and out without loosing resolution (This could be wrong but it makes sense to me). Another reason is that if you compress a 1080p or 4k video I image it's going to look worse than a compressed 8k video. Also going with an 8k cinema grade camera is going to yeild more benefits than just resolution, color quality and whatnot will get better too. And hell, if none of these are good enough reasons then mabey Linus did it just to say he had a baller camera.

As for the website Linus already owns floatplane which I'm not personally subbed to but I could imagine that theres at least 4k res. and higher picture quality than YouTube. And while yes, YouTube's compression does suck but it kinda makes sense when you realize that there are hundreds of hours of content uploaded every second and YouTube has to manage that all somehow and compressing files seems like a valid option.

 

Also I disagree with your opinion about Linus's swearing. While I don't mind it when I'm watching on my own, there are a few times were I've shown his videos to my family members and I don't want my little sister hearing f*ck, shit, and bitch any more than she has too. Also I'm sure that there are others less comfortable with swearing or that show his vids to their family more often and I don't think Linus wants to lose viewers over such an easy thing to avoid.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[kucharczykt]

2 minutes ago, tikker said:

Storing 4k media at home is still miles away from a service like YT offering that. Apparently 500 hours worth of videos is uploaded to YouTube every minute. Let's imagine that is Blu-ray quality UHD video at 80 Mbps (=10 MB/s). That would be10 MB/s * 3600 s / h * 500 h uploaded per minute which is 18,000,000 MB / min. = 18 TB / min. At 1440 min. / day that is 25.9 PB / day worth of content that you would need to process and store.

And YT is probably getting at least that over a week or so even with compression. 

One petabyte alone is hard to facilitate. Imagine the cost of storing 20PB+ only to run out every couple days.

 

[Arika]

I honestly don't even see the benefit of 4k on LTT videos, so 8k would just be a waste of bandwidth regardless of the platform serving it. 

[ZFSinmylungs]

@kucharczykt
" Also I disagree with your opinion about Linus's swearing. While I don't mind it when I'm watching on my own, there are a few times were I've shown his videos to my family members and I don't want my little sister hearing f*ck, shit, and bitch any more than she has too. Also I'm sure that there are others less comfortable with swearing or that show his vids to their family more often and I don't think Linus wants to lose viewers over such an easy thing to avoid."
Yeah - so have it optional.. which seems to be the case with floatplane already, huh?


@kucharczykt
Google is rich, especially with all the money from people's data. How else would they be able to afford all of that? :')
Also let's not forget that HDD-s and SSD-s only last from 5 to 10 years, so in that time - it's replacement time :)

[ZFSinmylungs]

@Arika S
Watching it on YouTube?

[Helpful Tech Witch]

1 hour ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

Is 8K even supported on YouTube?

yes

1 hour ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

Why does not Linus make his own YouTube-style website, for the true 8K experiences that people can have.. if they do get a 4k/8k monitor?

UM... Floatplane? I mean compression is a bitch still, you would need to have 67gb for 100min of 8k video, the data costs for themwill be insane.

1 hour ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

From the video title: This Camera Costs HOW MUCH?! - 8K RED Weapon Unboxing, HOLY $H!T Ep. 17
Well.. even if they had it - YouTube compresses shit anyways, like just look at someone who made a video uploading it over and over from YouTube.. it gets reaaally degraded, unwatchable by each pass.

Heres the thing, the bitrate goes up for every res increse, if you did the same thing, a 8k video would look ay better than a 1080p video most likley

[tikker]

1 hour ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

Google is rich, especially with all the money from people's data. How else would they be able to afford all of that? :')
Also let's not forget that HDD-s and SSD-s only last from 5 to 10 years, so in that time - it's replacement time

That only adds to the issue. At the rate YouTube is receiving data you relatively quickly reach the TBW (terabytes-written) rating for drives. Given that we still measure these in a few hundred TB just imagine the rate at which these things would need to be replaced. There are more efficient and cost-effective ways to store data, such as tape, but unfortunately they aren't the most suited for fast data access.

 

Getting blu-ray quality streaming is just realistic at this point or maybe ever. You might argue 4k streaming doesn't make the most sense already. The bitrates it's often served at are, e.g. ~15 Mbps for Netflix IIRC, is just barely the bitrate of a good quality 1080p blu-ray which is something like 20-30 Mbps.

 

P.S. If you want to quote people, there is the quote button at the bottom of their post. It's the little curved arrow. If you want @ to work you need to select their name from the little window that pops up.

[ZFSinmylungs]

@tikker
Yeah, or just store it on M-Disc disks - last 1000 years, never replace storage media such as a HDD or SSD again XD

"P.S. If you want to quote people, there is the quote button at the bottom of their post. It's the little curved arrow. If you want @ to work you need to select their name from the little window that pops up. "
If you want to advise people something, first quickly glance at their signature :'D
Mine is: "I cannot quote people with the built-in function because I almost never enable JavaScript on websites."
I got no "window that pops up", I'm a pro-no-JavaScript dude :/

[Arika]

10 hours ago, ZFSinmylungs said:

@Arika S
Watching it on YouTube?

Yes. I have never watched an LTT video and thought "i need to increase this to 4k to see additional details". Even when i watch youtube on my 4k TV, I still have it locked at 1080p.

 

Also you're not tagging people correctly so no one is getting notifications about your replies, it's better to just use the quote button at the bottom of people's posts

[Middcore]

On 8/14/2021 at 4:46 AM, Arika S said:

Also you're not tagging people correctly so no one is getting notifications about your replies, it's better to just use the quote button at the bottom of people's posts

 

< Removed by moderation >

 

@ZFSinmylungs, FYI, you're free to use forum features or not for whatever reason, but forum etiquette remains the same and you should be aware there's a good chance people won't notice your replies if you don't properly quote or tag them. You'll have to decide for yourself whether your stance on JavaScript is worth others members you're trying to converse with potentially just never even seeing what you say.

Edited August 15, 2021 by LogicalDrm