Daily Drop: Dried Flowers

[the-kitchen-slayer]

So, um... Sorry we're so nitpicky on your behalf?

The nitpickieness is both appreciated and understood (at least by me), so thank you for being so nitpicky ^^

 

[ewhac]

...

Is that you, John Draper?

Occasionally, we make a minor edit to keep the release on schedule. Because we're basically making a copy of a copy, the result is a little blurring in the HQ version. When this happens, we get replacements from the content creators to make things look pretty again as quickly as possible. We do this so that you, the audience, can have the best viewing experience possible while minimizing downtime that results from meeting our very high standards.

I can relate. I don't for a moment imagine that balancing visual quality against bandwidth costs is easy. I have this 720p/30 H.264 video I made in which not much moves. But because of a dissolve at the beginning, I had to encode at 2 Mbits/sec -- anything lower and it turned to blocky mush.

I've noticed in the last few weeks that you've also started doing temporal blurring as well (blending frame N with frame N+1). It's easy to spot in Yahtzee's videos where everything is a smash cut. You should have your video techs write up an article about all the tradeoffs they face, and all their discoveries into the secrets of 'ffmpeg'.

 

[CaptainCrunch]

...

Is that you, John Draper?

You're actually the first user to get the 'true' origin of my username. Alas, I am not John Draper, but merely someone who appreciates his contribution to communications systems as we know it.

Occasionally, we make a minor edit to keep the release on schedule. Because we're basically making a copy of a copy, the result is a little blurring in the HQ version. When this happens, we get replacements from the content creators to make things look pretty again as quickly as possible. We do this so that you, the audience, can have the best viewing experience possible while minimizing downtime that results from meeting our very high standards.

I can relate. I don't for a moment imagine that balancing visual quality against bandwidth costs is easy. I have this 720p/30 H.264 video I made in which not much moves. But because of a dissolve at the beginning, I had to encode at 2 Mbits/sec -- anything lower and it turned to blocky mush.

I've noticed in the last few weeks that you've also started doing temporal blurring as well (blending frame N with frame N+1). It's easy to spot in Yahtzee's videos where everything is a smash cut. You should have your video techs write up an article about all the tradeoffs they face, and all their discoveries into the secrets of 'ffmpeg'.

Any temporal blurring is at the content creator level, but I'll pass along your idea for an article to the ffMPEG wranglers since I thankfully don't have to deal with tweaking the command line nightmare of stream encoding.

 

[Megido]

Mom's gonna be soooo pissed that you broke her flower thingy!

 

[The Morrigan]

EDIT: Sorry to make it clear I meant VIDEO quality not content. I'm in the Pub-Club and the credits in particular seem a lot fuzzier for this episode. The high quality image really lets you see the shockwaves ripple out from the impact.

Phew, I'm glad it's not just me! I'm also Pub Club, and have noticed the fuzziness in the last couple of episodes. I was afraid it was my monitor.

Fuzziness aside, I enjoyed watching the flowers extricate themselves from the breaking glass... it almost looked like they were shrugging the fall off as "just a flesh wound."

 

[The Morrigan]

So, um... Sorry we're so nitpicky on your behalf?

Hahaha, your nitpickiness is appreciated always.

 

[daedrick]

Hey, christmas is coming, you better start breaking christmas stuff because there are so many christmas related stuff that you could destroy and I would enjoy...



christmas.

 

[Z of the Na'vi]

"Rosebud..."

 

[AdmiralMemo]

Not the best, but good enough.

 

[daxterx2005]

Smashed so fast, it was like Petal to the metal.