Also, @DJboutit2 are you using a 10bit display? The vast majority of consumers are on 8bit displays. The main benefit for me shooting and mastering in 10bit, is the dynamic range, and recover details when conditions were less than optimal.

[Link]

Where did you pull the stat that "most" devices can play H.265 10-bit no problem? By definition, you only need more than 50% of a sample to be able to claim "most".

Let's say 49.9% of a studio's turnover (keep profit in line for the sake of consistency) comes from customers whose devices don't support H.265 playback, which maintains your narrative that "most" devices support it. If the customers don't know how to or can't afford to upgrade to support H.265, that studio risks alienating or even losing a very large chunk of its customer base, income and profitability if it ceases publishing new content that older devices can't support outright or without a software upgrade.

Perhaps if you want the industry to believe it needs to move on to H.265, you need to convince it that it stands to gain more new business/expand its current custom by doing so than it risks losing out by not doing so. Saying a given bitrate for videos on a certain codec "sucks" just sounds like a moan from one person averse to buying more storage rather than something that will benefit studios and consumers alike.

[Link]

my other 2 year old medium-spec laptop can easily play 720p and 1080p. for 4k CPU usage is around 30%.

my 2 year old smartphone can also play x265.

so i think now in 2020 it is less about hardware support and more about editors reluctance to move to something new.

change is happening, we have been seeing more and more hollywood movies in x265, just a matter of time before everything is in x265.

i can agree with 10bit issue because still majority of people are on 8bit display.

Edited by - joi on 1/24/2020 2:57:24 PM

[Link]