I have noticed a few sites are now dropping 5500 bitrate 1080p videos why to save space?? Brazzers is one of the few sites doing this they use to drop 10500 bitrate videos now 5500 that are 1.4gb to 1.8gb these 1080p scenes look 25% worse than 720p scenes at 7000 to 7500 bitrate S M H. If Brazzers would go with 8000 to 8500 bitrate 1080p the videos would look 40% better and save 400mb to 1gb over 10500 bitrate videos. Edited by - DJboutit2 on Sep 22 2018 Topic Moved by - Flash on Sep 27 2018
^ three things: a) save space, either hard disk space on the server or on the client's hard disk (perhaps complaints by some users that the videos take up too much space) b) save bandwidth (both with downloads and streaming). At the range these sites operate, bandwidth cost might become a factor that appears to be possible to minimize. Also, maybe also some user complaints that downloading/streaming the 1080p on their smartphones eats too much off the data plan. c) (not sure about that) newer codecs might need less bitrate for the same quality, thing h.264 vs h.265, and future better codecs.
The OP clearly hasn't seen any of Brazzers older 'high quality' 1080 videos. Whilst Brazzers dropped their bit rate it's actually quite a fair bit better the quality of much of their older 1080p videos from just a couple years ago. Check out Lauren Phillips' first scene with Danny D on Brazzers as an example - 12K bitrate and over 3.5GB in file size. The video quality is beyond shit, looks like it was compressed several times over and filters were added. This suggests they're using better codecs on their newer content now, lower bitrate and lower file size, but no degradation in quality.
5 Mbps is 720 territory, I guess they can get away with it since the frame rate is 24 as opposed to 30 or even 60 But I'm sure they know what's best for their customers.
The video quality on new Brazzers scenes is really terrible now days. Not only did they cut the 1080p bitrate in half, there also some kind of wired filter that makes all skin texture and details blurred out. This feels like a massive step in the wrong direction, if anything they should move to higher quality and 4k.
The current crop of professional H.264 software encoders are far more efficient/advanced than the older ones (or Adobe's shitware encoder that many content producers have used for years!) and the cameras used today are far better at giving HQ source files because of the higher-resolutions of the image sensors and higher data rates used for capturing to SSD and flash-card media. Many of the advanced encoding techniques developed for still images and the newer video codecs have been ported to the advanced H.264 encoders that are now available. If you know what you're doing and what tools to use in the current crop of offerings, you can really get beautiful 1080P video files without sacrificing quality for space saving.
Trying to find a Twisty's thread here but the search facility is awful. In any case, their older videos pre-2016 are an utter disgrace. For a brief period they had 720p versions which were a couple gigs in size. Now they're all under 500MB, the quality is rubbish. Brazzers videos are actually better now than they were a few years ago, check out Alexa Tomas's first scene on there from 2015 in 1080, poorest '1080' quality i've seen in a long time, yet the file size was something like 4GB!
Could you post some links in a different topic to forums that have more acceptable search functions? I'm rewriting all of ADT at the moment and am open to suggestions.
The encoders are not the problem, the "problem" is the settings the editor put in as well as source video. If editors knew what they were doing they would use ffmpeg CLi to encode not a packaged up MPEG GUI.
You would think that companies would move to higher video quality when time and technology moves forward, But instead they go the other way only to save some storage space.
This really sucks for people who care about video quality, Especially if you collect scenes from certain stars that you want to have for a long time in the future.
I wonder if these site owners use FFMPEG, since they're offering downloads they don't have to set a bitrate or size limit (Like DVD), just set the CRF and let FFMPEG work it's magic.Those rates are for streaming. Streaming rates are always lower than download rates. They should use VP9/Webm and do adaptive streaming.
