When did 720p become the new SD? Quality sux!

You are not logged in
Log in | Register to Post

Featured New Release

If It Feels Good 6
Studio: Deeper
Release date: 7/31/2026

all new releases

Participate...

log in
register

Browse...

Etiquette
Active Topics
Popular Topics
Member List
Search

All Forums > Tech Talk > Tech Talk Forum Page 5 > When did 720p become the new SD? Quality sux!

Author	Post
draghixafan Senior Member Less identical crap, more sleaze and bush! 2378 Posts 7/09	Posted - Sep 24 2019 : 7:02PM Been wondering this for a while. When HD first came out the 1080 was 3-4g and the 720 was 1-2g. Now the 1080 is till 3-4g but the 720p has halved in size often around 700-800mb and looks like shit! Thoughts? Topic Moved by - flash on Sep 24 2019 [Link]
System Message	Posted - Sep 24 2019 : 10:51PM This topic was moved here from the The Porn Pool forum.
Mass Facialties Deactivated User "Facialized Vol. 7" 2021 AVN Awards Winner: Best Oral Movie 9308 Posts 9/13	Posted - Sep 25 2019 : 12:20AM ^ ^ Is this 720p size reduction for all porn sites or just certain ones? Edited by - Mass Facialties on 9/25/2019 12:20:42 AM [Link]
lex von v Senior Member 2511 Posts 12/12	Posted - Sep 25 2019 : 11:28AM not to devaluate your findings, but the numbers are far to general. You have 25minutes scenes and 60 minute scenes, it's clear that one cannot say a 720p scene only looks good if it has 2GB in size. Shorter scenes obviously need less space. Then you have to consider the codec that is used. These have evolved over time, with HVEC (h.265) using about half of what h.264 (standard MP4) required - with the same quality. HVEC of course takes much more processing power to encode the clip, so people might cut down on costs (and time) here, and use settings that still use lower bitrate but are lower quality, but faster to produce. Unfortunately, only looking at the bitrate and codec isn't enough, because - as I mentioned above - one could encode a video using bitrate x and still have it looking shitty simply because the same cookie-cutter encoding options were used. [Link]
AngryPirate Senior Member 3210 Posts 8/17	Posted - Sep 25 2019 : 4:43PM I have to agree with lex von v. You've been far too vague as the MB to minute ratio isn't an absolute measure of quality. [Link]

draghixafan Senior Member Less identical crap, more sleaze and bush! 2378 Posts 7/09	Posted - Sep 28 2019 : 8:37PM Hi guys, Yeah agree on all points.. not all sites, video lengths and tech.. The culprit was the recent nympho.com vid, the 720p is atrocious all blocky pixelation for one of the hottest pairings in recent porn memory.. Busty Takeover With Ella And Violet MODELS: ELLA KNOX, VIOLET MYERS Ella Knox https://tour.nympho.com/view/162/busty-takeover-with-ella-and-violet I thinks its the site becasue even their 12200kbps 1080p clocking in at a hefty 6.5g (h264) which should be bloody cinema quality looks shit for those specs too. But I had noticed this about a year or so ago with RealityKings too. Edited by - draghixafan on 9/28/2019 8:37:42 PM [Link]
Mass Facialties Deactivated User "Facialized Vol. 7" 2021 AVN Awards Winner: Best Oral Movie 9308 Posts 9/13	Posted - Sep 29 2019 : 3:14AM ^ Even in 1080p, the video quality of the scenes on Mike Adriano's sites (TrueAnal.com, Swallowed.com, Nympho.com and AllAnal.com) is underwhelming compared to other porn sites out there. With all the money he's got to be raking in now with those four sites, you'd think he'd upgrade his cameras like HardX did last year. By the way, why are you settling for 720p video? [Link]
AngryPirate Senior Member 3210 Posts 8/17	Posted - Sep 29 2019 : 6:05AM ^ Upgrading your camera alone means little to nothing if your editing and post-production process still uses old, inefficient codecs, a stingy video bitrate, poor colour grading tools and/or a monitor with poor colour accuracy. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 29 2019 : 1:26PM I am going to echo what those who are saying here have been saying that file size is an indication of nothing. As a real-life example, I have been trying to save my old student films. They were shot on S-VHS and Hi-8. At best, their quality on the masters that haven't deteriorated is slightly better than DVD quality. If I fail to toggle one button for the encode process, the end file is the size of an oversized 1080p file. This doesn't improve the quality of the video in one bit. Someone who knows what they are doing, and sets the levels based on what is going on in the scene, can make a smaller file that looks glorious whereas someone who doesn't (me) can make a huge file that isn't at all glorious. [Link]
draghixafan Senior Member Less identical crap, more sleaze and bush! 2378 Posts 7/09	Posted - Sep 29 2019 : 9:49PM Mass Facialties wrote: ^ Even in 1080p, the video quality of the scenes on Mike Adriano's sites (TrueAnal.com, Swallowed.com, Nympho.com and AllAnal.com) is underwhelming compared to other porn sites out there. With all the money he's got to be raking in now with those four sites, you'd think he'd upgrade his cameras like HardX did last year. By the way, why are you settling for 720p video? Click to expand Thanks bud, yeah sux their other scene together was on swallowed.com which make sense, so both look like crap. Is 265 standardised yet as been talking about how great that is for years now, and often the debate on whether there is no quality loss? And can we safely asume that most professional porn sites these days know the right buttons to push ;P Can we? haha Ok so size perhaps not the best indicator but in gerenal have noticed that some 720p is pretty crappy quality.. Oh yeah, I use 720p because here in Australia our broadband is shit, so we got a new National Broadband Netowrk and that is shit too :( My old unlimited ADSL2 was better and cheaper than my current fibre to the door in which there should be no quotas because its fibre to the fucking door! /rant Maybe I am just getting old.. but everything tech these days for all its advances seems to be getting worse instead of better [Link]
akonheartrob Member Love you Valentina 543 Posts 9/15	Posted - Sep 30 2019 : 2:05AM Glad someone talking about this topic. I think of this long back and had thought why these sites not shifted to x265 instead they sicked to old x264 codecs. Clearly x265 gives same quality result in lesser size. I talked with one director and he replied that not many devices in the market support x265 codec right now, they might shift it in the future (this was like a year back). He might be right, anyway as you talked about specifically Mike Adriano sites, their 720p is not worth watching, I agree on it. He seriously need to improve his camera setup/output quality. Some of old videos I have from videosz site has good quality compares to mike's one. [Link]
draghixafan Senior Member Less identical crap, more sleaze and bush! 2378 Posts 7/09	Posted - Oct 1 2019 : 11:36AM tbh I think sometimes SD's old 4:3 framed porn better than widescreen, felt a bit more intimate, and voyeuristic too, as often all you get in the extra screen on the side today is more of the white room or couch. [Link]
draghixafan Senior Member Less identical crap, more sleaze and bush! 2378 Posts 7/09	Posted - Oct 7 2019 : 10:03PM ^ did I kill my own argument lol [Link]
AngryPirate Senior Member 3210 Posts 8/17	Posted - Oct 8 2019 : 2:51AM It came across as more of a throwaway comment. I don't mind either way. If porn is badly framed in widescreen, to me it reflects more poorly on the cameraperson's lack of skill with composition. [Link]
draghixafan Senior Member Less identical crap, more sleaze and bush! 2378 Posts 7/09	Posted - Oct 9 2019 : 3:53AM Great for spooning etc positions but most cowgirl doggy etc just lots of empty space. Anyway sent swallowed.com an email asking him to upgrade his shit, see what happens.. [Link]

snufish Member 580 Posts 4/14	Posted - Jul 23 2020 : 12:24AM I noticed youtube removed the "hd" flag from 720 so I think they're implying 720 is SD. Too bad my old laptop can't stream above 360p. I wonder if porn sites are doing 2-pass slow 1080p encoding. I think 1080p should be minimum and they add lower res for streaming. [Link]
dann05 Member 6 Posts 7/20	Posted - Jul 27 2020 : 2:10PM Hd is 720p Full HD is 1080p If Youtube is removing their HD emblem from the video's they are actually wrong. But I'm really looking forward to Augmented Reality. Many divorces will follow when that sh*t hits the market. [Link]

All Forums > Tech Talk > Tech Talk Forum Page 5When did 720p become the new SD? Quality sux!

Previous topic: Wi Fi booster
Next topic: StackPath Web Application Firewall