Will LTT start producing 60 FPS videos?

[kingmustard]

They're not necessarily needed but always nice to have

[Moonzy]

Just now, kingmustard said:

They're not necessarily needed

but they add extra costs in term of processing, storage, etc etc

so i don't think they should do it unless there's a good reason to

 

unless if there's no extra cost to it, then sure, why not

[GuiltySpark_]

Some video's, more so the VLOG style video's with camera panning would really, really benefit from it. 

[AbydosOne]

43 minutes ago, kingmustard said:

They're not necessarily needed but always nice to have

I'm almost certain at one point Linus (or someone else LTT affiliated) addressed this, and basically said it doubled the load on pretty much every step of the production process, for much, much less than double the return. Don't quote me, though...

[YoungBlade]

You do realize that higher framerates are not free, right? Not only do they cost more on the production end by requiring more storage and computer resources, but they raise the requirements on the hardware viewing end. People who watch LTT on older phones, older laptops, older tablets or older media streaming devices (like Blu-Ray players) can have stuttering issues with 1080p60 videos that don't occur at 1080p30. Some devices don't even allow you to watch YouTube at 1080p and above when it's 60fps. Case and point: because I watch in-browser and the display's refresh rate is limited, my phone will not allow me to watch 1080p video for YouTubers who do upload at 60fps. I'm limited to 720p for those videos. LTT and J2C are about the only tech channels left where I can actually watch in 1080p or higher on my phone. So I actually would be hurt by such a decision.

 

Can someone here please explain to me what the benefit is of 60fps LTT videos? Let's just take today's video: Shooting a 500 Megapixel Photo!

 

Where would this benefit from the higher framerate? Can someone point to a scene where 60fps would make a meaningful difference here?

[Chris Pratt]

45 minutes ago, AbydosOne said:

I'm almost certain at one point Linus (or someone else LTT affiliated) addressed this, and basically said it doubled the load on pretty much every step of the production process, for much, much less than double the return. Don't quote me, though...

Sounds right. I remember hearing the same, but can't place the context of a particular video or anything. Regardless, it's true.

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

3 hours ago, kingmustard said:

They're not necessarily needed but always nice to have

For content that's mostly a static camera staring at a host... you probably won't notice the difference. There's not a lot of camera movement in any of LMG's content so it's just a waste. 

[ImAlsoRan]

60FPS is more demanding in every stage of the production pipeline, and 24FPS typically looks more lifelike (at wide shutter angles). Some people get uncomfortable after watching a 60FPS video for so long since the shutter's speed has to be smaller and the motion blur won't look realistic. It's called the "soap opera effect". Anytime you notice something being 24FPS, it's shot poorly.

[Bitter]

GN is doing their stuff in 60fps and it looks really really nice, but they're also much much lower volume.

[BondiBlue]

Some videos would be nice to have in 60FPS, but not all of them need it. It takes more computational resources to record, edit, store, and play, and for most things it's just not necessary. LMG already puts out a large number of videos per week with all of their various channels, so you can just imagine the file size increase that would be associated with that. 

[crazzp]

Here you go, start from 34:39