this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2025
484 points (92.6% liked)

Technology

75756 readers
8008 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A new study published in Nature by University of Cambridge researchers just dropped a pixelated bomb on the entire Ultra-HD market, but as anyone with myopia can tell you, if you take your glasses off, even SD still looks pretty good :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.ca 273 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Kind of a tangent, but properly encoded 1080p video with a decent bitrate actually looks pretty damn good.

A big problem is that we've gotten so used to streaming services delivering visual slop, like YouTube's 1080p option which is basically just upscaled 720p and can even look as bad as 480p.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 110 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Yeah I'd way rather have higher bitrate 1080 than 4k. Seeing striping in big dark or light spots on the screen is infuriating

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 42 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 25 points 3 days ago (1 children)

For most streaming? Yeah.

Give me a good 4k Blu-ray though. High bitrate 4k

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 15 points 3 days ago

I mean yeah I'll take higher quality. I'd just rather have less lossy compression than higher resolution

[–] makyo@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I was wondering when we’d get to the snake oil portion of the video hobby that audiophiles have been suffering. 8k vs. 4k is the new lossy vs. lossless argument.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 days ago

Just recently, on this site, someone tried to tell me that there was no audible difference between 128kbps and 360kbps mp3. Insane.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 45 points 3 days ago (1 children)

A big problem is that we’ve gotten so used to streaming services delivering visual slop, like YouTube’s 1080p option which is basically just upscaled 720p and can even look as bad as 480p.

YouTube is locking the good bitrates behind the premium paywall and even as a premium users you don't get to select a high bitrate when the source video was low res.

That's why videos should be upscaled before upload to force YouTube into offering high bitrate options at all. A good upscaler produces better results than simply stretching low-res videos.

[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

I think the premium thing is a channel option. Some channels consistently have it, some don't.

Regular YouTube 1080p is bad and feels like 720p. The encoding on videos with "Premium 1080p" is catastrophic. It's significantly worse than decently encoded 480p. Creators will put a lot of time and effort in their lighting and camera gear, then the compression artifacting makes the video feel like watching a porn bootleg on a shady site. I guess there must be a strong financial incentive to nuke their video quality this way.

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 12 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This. The visual difference of good vs bad 1080p is bigger than between good 1080p and good 4k. I will die on this hill. And Youtube's 1080p is garbage on purpose so they get you to buy premium to unlock good 1080p. Assholes

[–] TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago

The 1080p for premium users is garbage too. Youtube's video quality in general is shockingly poor. If there is even a slight amount of noisy movement on screen (foliage, confetti, rain, snow, etc) the the video can literally become unwatchable.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 days ago

HEVC is damn efficient. I don’t even bother with HD because a 4K HDR encode around 5-10GB looks really good and streams well for my remote users.

[–] Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago

I've been investing in my bluray collection again and I can't believe how good 1080p blurays look compared to "UHD streaming" .

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I stream YouTube at 360p. Really don't need much for that kind of video.

360p is awful, 720p is the sweet spot IMO.