Question about Floatplane bitrate

[AlTech]

Hi,

 

Does anybody know what bitrate Floatplane uses at the resolutions supported?

 

I'm asking cos 1080p Floatplane doesn't look too different to YouTube in terms of bitrate and overall quality.

 

And, is there any plan to increase the bitrate of Floatplane videos anytime soon?

 

Also, can we have framerate options like 30fps and 60fps?

 

Thanks.

[yolosnail]

I've always said that floatplane looks pretty much identical to YouTube when it comes to LMG videos, whereas with Bitwit videos the quality is a lot better than YouTube, so in terms of the platform, its great, its the source footage that isn't.

[colonel_mortis]

The bitrate on Floatplane videos is variable - it targets a particular quality rather than bitrate so complex scenes will look good while simple scenes won't use up much bandwidth.

2 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Also, can we have framerate options like 30fps and 60fps?

LMG don't produce their videos at other frame rates (and they have previously (when 60fps was pretty new on YT) done experiments that suggested that the only benefits on their videos to a higher frame rate were placebo).

[-TesseracT-]

2 hours ago, colonel_mortis said:

The bitrate on Floatplane videos is variable - it targets a particular quality rather than bitrate so complex scenes will look good while simple scenes won't use up much bandwidth.

LMG don't produce their videos at other frame rates (and they have previously (when 60fps was pretty new on YT) done experiments that suggested that the only benefits on their videos to a higher frame rate were placebo).

60 fps looks so much better

[colonel_mortis]

3 minutes ago, -TesseracT- said:

60 fps looks so much better

That's what lots of people said when LMG doubled every frame (so it was "60fps" according to the quality selector only). For gaming, by all means 60fps makes sense but for watching Linus talk to a camera what small benefits there are would not justify reducing the capture resolution in order to film at 60fps.

[AlTech]

5 hours ago, colonel_mortis said:

The bitrate on Floatplane videos is variable - it targets a particular quality rather than bitrate so complex scenes will look good while simple scenes won't use up much bandwidth.

LMG don't produce their videos at other frame rates (and they have previously (when 60fps was pretty new on YT) done experiments that suggested that the only benefits on their videos to a higher frame rate were placebo).

Oh ok cos I haven't been terribly impressed by the quality.

 

Is there any plans to increase bitrate anytime soon?

 

Could've sworn an original selling point of floatplane was high bitrate 1080p.

[LinusTech]

From frame analysis our 1080p looks similar to YouTube's 4K.

 

We've done some experimentation with 4K (at a proportionally higher average bitrate) and FP absolutely smashes YT's 4K.

 

But that's not something we're ready to roll out yet!

 

Linus

[LogicalDrm]

1 hour ago, AluminiumTech said:

Oh ok cos I haven't been terribly impressed by the quality.

 

Is there any plans to increase bitrate anytime soon?

 

Could've sworn an original selling point of floatplane was high bitrate 1080p.

Tbh quality varies between videos. Pick some really well made video from FP, like final video of desk PC build, and compare that to YT. I've watched it with my 1080p 24'' and friends 100'' projector, and it really looks great. According to said friend, YT 4k on his 40'' monitor wasn't noticeably better.

[LAwLz]

10 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Does anybody know what bitrate Floatplane uses at the resolutions supported?

I just want to point out that bit rate is not really a good indicator of image quality. These two files have the same bit rate and resolution but you can clearly tell that one looks better than the other:

Video 1 (Bad quality 2500Kbps)

Video 2 (Good quality 2500Kbps)

 

 

7 hours ago, colonel_mortis said:

LMG don't produce their videos at other frame rates (and they have previously (when 60fps was pretty new on YT) done experiments that suggested that the only benefits on their videos to a higher frame rate were placebo).

5 hours ago, colonel_mortis said:

That's what lots of people said when LMG doubled every frame (so it was "60fps" according to the quality selector only). For gaming, by all means 60fps makes sense but for watching Linus talk to a camera what small benefits there are would not justify reducing the capture resolution in order to film at 60fps.

Actually, they uploaded at least one video which was true 60 FPS and it was incredibly easy to tell.

It's a pretty funny thread to read, because at least a few people are calling others sheep and arguing that the video is actually 30 FPS, despite it clearly being 60 FPS.

On page 2 Linus jumped in and confirmed that the channel super fun video was true 60 FPS.

 

Just goes to show how blindly some people trust Linus. To the point of insulting others who just point out the obvious.

[LinusTech]

We did upload one video that was 30 up sampled to 60 on LTT ad an experiment and the comments were full of people amazed at how awesome it was. That was when we decided there was no good reason to move our editorial content to 60.

 

We may actually take a turn towards 24 fps and wide format filming for certain projects. There are loud voices internally who are asking for it... 

[LAwLz]

7 minutes ago, LinusTech said:

We may actually take a turn towards 24 fps and wide format filming for certain projects. There are loud voices internally who are asking for it... 

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure YouTube doesn't support 21:9 video. If that's the case then, as you are probably already aware, you will need to create a 16:9 video and then artificially add black bars. Why would you do that? It will look bad on 16:9 monitors because you're just taking screen real estate away, and it will look horrendously bad on 21:9 monitors because they will have black bars on both the sides and top/bottom.

[vanished]

8 hours ago, colonel_mortis said:

The bitrate on Floatplane videos is variable - it targets a particular quality rather than bitrate so complex scenes will look good while simple scenes won't use up much bandwidth.

Oh, that's pretty cool actually

8 hours ago, colonel_mortis said:

LMG don't produce their videos at other frame rates (and they have previously (when 60fps was pretty new on YT) done experiments that suggested that the only benefits on their videos to a higher frame rate were placebo).

Well, yeah that would be the case when it's only filmed in <= 30 fps

3 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Could've sworn an original selling point of floatplane was high bitrate 1080p.

When it first came out I compared to youtube and found FP to be significantly better but not long after I looked again and couldn't really see the same difference so idk if something changed...

[Taja]

Never understood this "60 fps is better" on videos that it literally does not matter. I guess if you show a photo with a 30 fps conter and the same Photo with a 60 fps counter, people will say that the 60 fps one is "obviously better"

[David007]

1 hour ago, LinusTech said:

We did upload one video that was 30 up sampled to 60 on LTT ad an experiment and the comments were full of people amazed at how awesome it was. That was when we decided there was no good reason to move our editorial content to 60.

 

We may actually take a turn towards 24 fps and wide format filming for certain projects. There are loud voices internally who are asking for it... 

That’s funny, sounds like “let’s trick people because we don’t want to upload in 60 fps”, why else would you do that? Just don’t do it, why deceive people to try and prove a point?

[vanished]

40 minutes ago, David007 said:

That’s funny, sounds like “let’s trick people because we don’t want to upload in 60 fps”, why else would you do that? Just don’t do it, why deceive people to try and prove a point?

Because it worked and proves most people think it's better if it just says 60 even if the content is the same?

[vanished]

Ok so I decided to redo my comparison using a recent video:

Spoiler

Comparing FP 1080p to YouTube 1440p (I guess LTT stopped uploading in "4K"?) I'd say these shots are very similar in terms of detail and clarity, with perhaps better colour on the FP one (less splotchy look).

 

I'd say the "Sony" logo looks slightly sharper on the Youtube shot, and FP tends to add a "roughness" to curves that are smooth on YouTube, but these are very minor things.  FP does colour better (less artifacts and banding) imo and this is something you will see more readily when watching.

[Bouzoo]

1 hour ago, Taja said:

Never understood this "60 fps is better" on videos that it literally does not matter.

You can notice the difference on pretty much everything. You can look at any E3 showcase. Don't look up games but the presenters and especially the audience. Many people may not notice it or care at all, but you an clearly see the difference. Does it matter? Absolutely not. But there is a difference, and it's noticeable. 

[vanished]

2 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

You can notice the difference on pretty much everything. You can look at any E3 showcase. Don't look up games but the presenters and especially the audience. Many people may not notice it or care at all, but you an clearly see the difference. Does it matter? Absolutely not. But there is a difference, and it's noticeable. 

Yeah an actual 60 fps video is instantly and obviously noticeable, just as it would be in a game, but 30 "upscaled" to 60 is not going to help, which is what they tried and found people thought it was better anyway, proving there was a significant placebo effect, and since this is all they can do without switching to actually filming and editing in 60 fps, I don't expect them to change.

[Taja]

Just now, Bouzoo said:

You can notice the difference on pretty much everything. You can look at any E3 showcase. Don't look up games but the presenters and especially the audience. Many people may not notice it or care at all, but you an clearly see the difference. Does it matter? Absolutely not. But there is a difference, and it's noticeable. 

well, I cant. And I tried, just to try to understand why people talk about it, and even changing from 30 to 60 in the same video multiple times and paying attention, I just cant.

That means it does not have a difference? absolutely not, but it does indicate how small the difference is, since some people cant see it even when trying hard to do it. And its not like I dont feel a HUGE difference in games between 30 and 60 fps.

Finally, why bother to use more space and processing just to make something arguably irrelevant? I wouldnt use my resources on this and I wont expect LTT to do it.

[Bouzoo]

4 minutes ago, Taja said:

well, I cant. And I tried, just to try to understand why people talk about it, and even changing from 30 to 60 in the same video multiple times and paying attention, I just cant.

That means it does not have a difference? absolutely not, but it does indicate how small the difference is, since some people cant see it even when trying hard to do it. And its not like I dont feel a HUGE difference in games between 30 and 60 fps.

Finally, why bother to use more space and processing just to make something arguably irrelevant? I wouldnt use my resources on this and I wont expect LTT to do it.

Really? You can't notice it? Not even a little?

I do understand the decision due to space issue, don't worry. 

 

I would also like to ask @LinusTech how much more space do 60 FPS videos take? Or actually that one that they did for that matter. Is it literally double? Iirc you guys had WAN Show in 50 FPS as well?

[William Payne]

The thing with FPS is we naturally see motion blur in our vision. You have to decide what you want whether its cinematic video, realistic video, or ultra smooth video. 

 

You can argue until the cows come home about what looks better, high fps does allow nice slow motion, but I compare it a lot to people who buy lenses for cameras. There is a subset of people out there who will buy a super fast aperture lens like say F1.4 and then they will shoot at F1.4 all the time rather then playing with different apertures. 

 

I see the same thing with some video guys, they buy a camera that can shoot 60fps and so they just always shoot 60fps. Rather then playing around with different frame rates based on what look they want. 

[AJJaxNet]

4 hours ago, LinusTech said:

We did upload one video that was 30 up sampled to 60 on LTT ad an experiment and the comments were full of people amazed at how awesome it was. That was when we decided there was no good reason to move our editorial content to 60.

 

We may actually take a turn towards 24 fps and wide format filming for certain projects. There are loud voices internally who are asking for it... 

Please don't do 24 fps, I personally find that it has a choppy feeling vs 30 FPS, most certainly because that the refresh rate doesn't line up with most screen refresh rate (60hz)

[LinusTech]

5 minutes ago, AJJaxNet said:

Please don't do 24 fps, I personally find that it has a choppy feeling vs 30 FPS, most certainly because that the refresh rate doesn't line up with most screen refresh rate (60hz)

Fair point. 

 

The most likely path forward for us is 4K UHD 30p. 

 

Personally I'm not that fussed one way or the other but there are those on the team who don't like the "soap opera effect" so I doubt we will move to 60 fps anytime soon. 

[AJJaxNet]

Just now, LinusTech said:

Fair point. 

 

The most likely path forward for us is 4K UHD 30p. 

 

Personally I'm not that fussed one way or the other but there are those on the team who don't like the "soap opera effect" so I doubt we will move to 60 fps anytime soon. 

Totally voting on 4K 30fps, like said multiple times in this thread, there's no need for 60fps for the style of videos that LTT generally makes. It's funny because you actually uploaded a 60p video not long ago because it made sense (The Xbox X vs PS4 Pro vs 500$ PC) 

[vanished]

6 minutes ago, LinusTech said:

Fair point. 

 

The most likely path forward for us is 4K UHD 30p. 

 

Personally I'm not that fussed one way or the other but there are those on the team who don't like the "soap opera effect" so I doubt we will move to 60 fps anytime soon. 

Yeah, I know some people really hate the look of smooth video, even some people who do see the difference and prefer high framerate in games, so it might be best to stick to 30 for that and technical reasons.  Personally I think I'd prefer 60 even if most content wouldn't hugely benefit from it but yeah, everyone is different