should linus start uploading his videos in 60fps?

[xyzain]

No because then I won't be able to watch 1080p reviews anymore..please don't take that away from me!

[bry.yyyy]

yes

[-TesseracT-]

Yes ofc, it looks amazing.

[MiracleMan]

No, i think all this PC master race gibberish did let you forget when 60 FPS is important and when not...

[Omon_Ra]

Hell yah FPS means better video. But for this kind of channel, not really a priority, especially if it's impractical or expensive or sacrifices 4k. It's not game footage, or action scenes.

It's Linus and Luke standing at a vert desk making subtle dick jokes with tech hardware in front of them. This channel in a nutshell.

If that's the case, why doesn't every movie shoot with a Phantom 1000fps camera? Did you see 'The Hobbit' in high framerate 3D? That was awful. I understand Peter Jackson's decision to do it, but the end result...do not want.

For gameplay, yes, more FPS means better quality. For motion picture, it's not empirically 'better,' it really just depends on what you're shooting.

[Mr.Sommer-Hansen]

i think it is fine as it is.. but they are on the other hand forced to keep up with developments..

hmm so as long as it does not create problems uploading or stream.. i guess that im fine with it

[Psykomantis00]

If no, then why not? There is no reason not to really unless it would add a significant amount of time to render/upload I don't see why not. 

[Rettiekadettie]

Nah,it's fine the way it is.

[Robi_g]

Don't use chrome so wouldn't get 60fps anyway. There's no fast moving action that needs to be captured either so I really don't see the benefit.

[Brandonsr]

Like he said on his stream, there is simply no point in doing 60 fps on majority of his videos. Besides, he already stated that his setup has to choose between 4k and 60fps, and he would rather have 4k.

[TetraSky]

I sure hope not... 60fps videos don't even playback in HD in firefox for me, says there's an error, my friend also has the same issue with using firefox and HD 60fps enabled videos. 480p or lower does work though.

It takes more bandwidth than necessary. 60fps will not benefit Linus Media Group at all, they aren't a gaming channel, it doesn't take 60fps to show a bunch of slides or piechart or whatever.

[MiracleMan]

If no, then why not? There is no reason not to really unless it would add a significant amount of time to render/upload I don't see why not. 

they would have to shoot in 1080p instead of 4k and its not like there is any benefit from 60fps if linus doesn't suddenly start jumping and running around during reviews

[EST_FatBoy]

No, its broken for me at the moment (Firefox)

[Glenwing]

If no, then why not? There is no reason not to really unless it would add a significant amount of time to render/upload I don't see why not. 

 

Well of course it would, the videos would be double the size and take double the time to render.  There is little to no tangible benefit to 60fps on this type of media, and it would put a lot more strain on their resources and ability to produce videos, so this is not a "just because they can" type of decision, there are some serious costs that it would need to outweigh to be justified.  60fps probably wouldn't make it worse, but it doesn't really add much either, so in my opinion the costs to Linus and crew (and by extension, to us, since it would take longer for a video to get from editing to finished and uploaded) are not justified by any stretch of the imagination

[Psykomantis00]

they would have to shoot in 1080p instead of 4k and its not like there is any benefit from 60fps if linus doesn't suddenly start jumping and running around during reviews

makes sense to me. 

[loccilucas]

What's the point. You won't see any massive difference.

[Sharp_3yE]

NO because it would just take to much resources and longer to upload videos. Do we really need an unboxing in 60FPS? no!

I think they should to a TechQuickie showing the difference some how but no they shouldn't upload 60 fps videos for every video. They could also do game play in 60 fps.

[Pingypoker]

I would much rather have 1080p at 60fps over 4k at 30fps right now. Even on my 1440p monitor the 4k content isn't that big of a change as compared to 60fps.

[Thekidd]

60FPS FTW!!

[Calavera]

It would not benefit me in any way, since my internet speed only allows for 480P anyway.

Does that mean I need to limit you to that too? Nah.

Only thing that'd really keep them from doing so is that it takes up a lot more space - thus costing more money.

[Calavera]

If that's the case, why doesn't every movie shoot with a Phantom 1000fps camera? Did you see 'The Hobbit' in high framerate 3D? That was awful. I understand Peter Jackson's decision to do it, but the end result...do not want.

For gameplay, yes, more FPS means better quality. For motion picture, it's not empirically 'better,' it really just depends on what you're shooting.

You know, the 24 framerate that everyone grew to love is really rather impractical, if anything it looks worse.

It's just that we've gotten used to it and thus started liking it - yet the human eye works at a much higher framerate (if you could compare them anyway) so in a way it's more realistic.

Does it feel very differently? Yes.

 

Truth be told, if we always watched movies at 60fps or something alike, you'd hate 24fps as much as you hate the higher framerates.

[smjpl]

There is absolutely no benefit to uploading videos in 60fps. It is just a waste of resources.

[spwath]

That has been postponed until they find a new location for LMG

new location???

[Omon_Ra]

You know, the 24 framerate that everyone grew to love is really rather impractical, if anything it looks worse.

It's just that we've gotten used to it and thus started liking it - yet the human eye works at a much higher framerate (if you could compare them anyway) so in a way it's more realistic.

Does it feel very differently? Yes.

 

Truth be told, if we always watched movies at 60fps or something alike, you'd hate 24fps as much as you hate the higher framerates.

 

You are correct, and this does get to the point of subjectivity by the viewer. I know some people did like the HFR 3D in 'The Hobbit;' I found it made everything look plastic and artificial. The human eye is capable of much 'higher framerates' as you said, which is why we don't see motion blur (typically) with moving objects. Having said that though, 24fps is a vestige of the film days; the aesthetic of the motion blur with a shutter angle of 180* has become such a part of the 'cinematic look' that it has become standard. Remember when you could distinctly tell the difference between a video camera (VHS or the like) and a movie shot on film? That was only a difference of 6fps (24fps for film, 30fps for video). Granted, there were vast differences in dynamic range, interlaced scanning and other factors, but the way people and objects appeared to move in video versus film was different.

 

It's more than likely if film cameras started at 60fps, 24fps would look weird now, but they didn't. What differentiates between 'real life' and 'filmed life' (in the sense of anything captured by camera) is the fact that it is at slower framerates than 'reality.' I think what happened, for me at least, with the high frame rate 3D is it started to put a lot of stuff in the 'uncanny valley' because it was closer to 'real life' but not to the point where it fully convinced me.

[IdortMasterRace]

It really makes zero fucking difference when I'm watching a YouTube tech video, seriously.