YouTube videos go 1280x720 - Page 2

Atak_Snajpera · 26th November 2008, 22:23

Quote:

From a reliable source, I can confirm all my above information is now outdated, and Youtube has decided to change their strategy a bit

(PROTIP: Expect them to update their x264 soon )

I hope that you taught them how to use all weapons in x264 arsenal

No cabac , only 1 ref , no 8x8DCT is a major sin.

AnnaFan777 · 29th November 2008, 06:26

Can someone get the youtube trick to work?

slavickas · 29th November 2008, 15:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera

I hope that you taught them how to use all weapons in x264 arsenal

No cabac , only 1 ref , no 8x8DCT is a major sin.

my guess that crap Apple TV is responsbile for this...

2Bdecided · 30th November 2008, 01:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by AnnaFan777

Can someone get the youtube trick to work?

Yes, it still works even for new videos this week...
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rlLJsbvvoKU&fmt=22

Just upload 1280x720 and add &fmt=22 to the URL

Cheers,
David.

easy2Bcheesy · 30th November 2008, 10:23

Is it possible to embed the HD versions at 640x360? This is the best hosted streaming video I've yet seen.

My own attempt at uploading a 4mbps 720p30fps wasn't that great. Refuses to run in HD at all!

EDIT: It does work but you need to give it plenty of time after its first encodes to do the HD ones.

slavickas · 30th November 2008, 14:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by easy2Bcheesy

Is it possible to embed the HD versions at 640x360? This is the best hosted streaming video I've yet seen.

http://www.mydigitallife.info/2008/1...t22-code-hack/

easy2Bcheesy · 30th November 2008, 16:51

They seem to have closed that loophole as even the sample code in the feature doesn't appear to work any more - you get the low resolution version up instead

Nightshiver · 30th November 2008, 20:23

It's why you should use vreel.net instead of youtube.

cyberbeing · 1st December 2008, 03:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by easy2Bcheesy

They seem to have closed that loophole as even the sample code in the feature doesn't appear to work any more - you get the low resolution version up instead

I just checked http://www.mydigitallife.info/2008/1...t22-code-hack/ and the video they have embeded on the bottom is the 720p version. Are you talking about something else?

2Bdecided · 1st December 2008, 12:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyberbeing

I just checked http://www.mydigitallife.info/2008/1...t22-code-hack/ and the video they have embeded on the bottom is the 720p version.

Works here too.

I think you'd be brave to force that version (and only that version) onto typical website visitors though - it would be glitchy and/or re-buffering constantly for many many people.

Cheers,
David.

Flux · 4th December 2008, 16:23

This is a bit off-topic because I didn't want to create a new thread for one simple question and it is related to Youtube anyway.

Does Youtube honor any aspect ratio flags? For example, if one has anamorphic video, there is a way to force Youtube player to use resize on it?

um3k · 6th December 2008, 01:06

YouTube HD is now official. HD videos now have a link below them that says "watch in HD". Turns out a video I uploaded way back in September is available in HD. Guess they've been preparing for a while!

Charbax2 · 6th December 2008, 10:05

I posted a basic comparison of the Online video sites that provide free HD Flash streaming: http://techvideoblog.com/reviews/onl...ty-comparison/

Youtube HD: 1280×720 - 2mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 44hz stereo 254kbit/s AAC audio

Facebook HD: 1280×720 - 2.5mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 44hz 146kbit/s AAC stereo audio

SmugMug HD: 640×360 - 1.4mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 48hz AAC stereo audio

Sevenload HD: 1280×720 - 1.8mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 48hz 96kbit/s AAC stereo audio

Vimeo HD: 1280×720 - 1.7mbit/s VP6 - full framerate - 44hz 128kbit/s mp3 stereo audio

Would you like to do some more advanced comparative testing, especially compare Youtube HD and Facebook HD?

My initial test shows Facebook has chosen to encode with 500kbit/s more bitrate. Any other differences in the way the H264 files are encoded?

Dark Shikari · 6th December 2008, 10:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charbax2

I posted a basic comparison of the Online video sites that provide free HD Flash streaming: http://techvideoblog.com/reviews/onl...ty-comparison/

Youtube HD: 1280×720 - 2mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 44hz stereo 254kbit/s AAC audio

Facebook HD: 1280×720 - 2.5mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 44hz 146kbit/s AAC stereo audio

SmugMug HD: 640×360 - 1.4mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 48hz AAC stereo audio

Sevenload HD: 1280×720 - 1.8mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 48hz 96kbit/s AAC stereo audio

Vimeo HD: 1280×720 - 1.7mbit/s VP6 - full framerate - 44hz 128kbit/s mp3 stereo audio

Would you like to do some more advanced comparative testing, especially compare Youtube HD and Facebook HD?

My initial test shows Facebook has chosen to encode with 500kbit/s more bitrate. Any other differences in the way the H264 files are encoded?

Facebook uses full High Profile and medium-high-ish quality x264 settings. Youtube uses a very old x264 version (unless they've fixed it since a few days ago) and Baseline profile.

Atak_Snajpera · 6th December 2008, 12:28

Quote:

Youtube uses a very old x264 version (unless they've fixed it since a few days ago) and Baseline profile.

Why they always must stay behind in terms of quality? is that hard for Google/YouTube to update x264 and use recommended settings by developers. It does not require 1 milion bucks !

NerdWithNoLife · 6th December 2008, 16:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera

Why they always must stay behind in terms of quality? is that hard for Google/YouTube to update x264 and use recommended settings by developers. It does not require 1 milion bucks !

But it wouldn't hurt to pay the wise people in this forum for some advice. You'd do it for half that, right guys?

LoRd_MuldeR · 6th December 2008, 16:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera

Why they always must stay behind in terms of quality? is that hard for Google/YouTube to update x264 and use recommended settings by developers. It does not require 1 milion bucks !

Most likely updating all their severs is a huge amount of work for such a big service. Also I think they wouldn't throw a new version on their severs until it has been tested excessively.
So why change a running system? The average Youtube user wouldn't notice the difference anyway, that's for sure!

And most important: Youtube's business was never to deliver high quality video, but to reach as many users as possible. That's a reason to go "Baseline" profile...

Atak_Snajpera · 6th December 2008, 17:37

Quote:

So why change a running system? The average Youtube user wouldn't notice the difference anyway, that's for sure!

So why x264 instead of deafault VP6 or any other crap codec like h.263??? Latest revisions are more stable than those year ago.

Quote:

Most likely updating all their severs is a huge amount of work for such a big service.

They should use recent builds from the beginning when they decided to introduce 720p!

FaceBook quality is very good. r1019 AQ + PsyRdo rules
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=561481753914

LoRd_MuldeR · 6th December 2008, 17:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera

So why x264 instead of deafault VP6 or any other crap codec like h.263??? Latest revisions are more stable than those year ago.

Even a pretty old revision of x264 should compress more efficient than VP6 or h.263, so it helps to safe bandwidth. And bandwidth costs money

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera

They should use recent builds from the beginning when they decided to introduce 720p!

Maybe they took the latest revision of x264 when they first started their experiments with 720p/H.264 and didn't update since then.

After all we can only speculate. Quite possible that they had a project running to evaluate options for adding h.264 support and the project is done now, so nobody is actively working on it...

Dark Shikari · 7th December 2008, 00:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoRd_MuldeR

Most likely updating all their severs is a huge amount of work for such a big service.

No it isn't, it's a trivial amount of work.

It's just that Pascal is incredibly lazy...

30th November 2008, 10:23	#25 \| Link
easy2Bcheesy Moderator Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 643	Is it possible to embed the HD versions at 640x360? This is the best hosted streaming video I've yet seen. My own attempt at uploading a 4mbps 720p30fps wasn't that great. Refuses to run in HD at all! EDIT: It does work but you need to give it plenty of time after its first encodes to do the HD ones. Last edited by easy2Bcheesy; 30th November 2008 at 16:25.

30th November 2008, 16:51	#27 \| Link
easy2Bcheesy Moderator Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 643	They seem to have closed that loophole as even the sample code in the feature doesn't appear to work any more - you get the low resolution version up instead Last edited by easy2Bcheesy; 30th November 2008 at 16:55.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

29th November 2008, 06:26	#22 \| Link
AnnaFan777 Registered User Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 51	Can someone get the youtube trick to work?

30th November 2008, 20:23	#28 \| Link
Nightshiver Quality Freak Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Area 52 Posts: 597	It's why you should use vreel.net instead of youtube.

4th December 2008, 16:23	#31 \| Link
Flux Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Finland Posts: 109	This is a bit off-topic because I didn't want to create a new thread for one simple question and it is related to Youtube anyway. Does Youtube honor any aspect ratio flags? For example, if one has anamorphic video, there is a way to force Youtube player to use resize on it?

6th December 2008, 01:06	#32 \| Link
um3k Registered User Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 220	YouTube HD is now official. HD videos now have a link below them that says "watch in HD". Turns out a video I uploaded way back in September is available in HD. Guess they've been preparing for a while!

6th December 2008, 10:05	#33 \| Link
Charbax2 Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 27	I posted a basic comparison of the Online video sites that provide free HD Flash streaming: http://techvideoblog.com/reviews/onl...ty-comparison/ Youtube HD: 1280×720 - 2mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 44hz stereo 254kbit/s AAC audio Facebook HD: 1280×720 - 2.5mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 44hz 146kbit/s AAC stereo audio SmugMug HD: 640×360 - 1.4mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 48hz AAC stereo audio Sevenload HD: 1280×720 - 1.8mbit/s H264 - full framerate - 48hz 96kbit/s AAC stereo audio Vimeo HD: 1280×720 - 1.7mbit/s VP6 - full framerate - 44hz 128kbit/s mp3 stereo audio Would you like to do some more advanced comparative testing, especially compare Youtube HD and Facebook HD? My initial test shows Facebook has chosen to encode with 500kbit/s more bitrate. Any other differences in the way the H264 files are encoded?