Active Topics

 


Reply
Thread Tools
Moderator | Posts: 5,320 | Thanked: 4,464 times | Joined on Oct 2009
#41
Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
What you want is a maximum quality picture with minimum distortion. Simply cramming data onto the machine that is inevitably going to be thrown away during the down-scaling process is not the best way to do this. The best way is to use a video encoding system to re-encode a high-resolution, low compression source video into the native resolution of your device at the lowest compression level (or highest bitrate) that your device can handle.

Again, I use handbrake for this. I use it both for the HD videos I get from the net (high-res, but heavily compressed) and for my library of DVDs (standard-def, but low compression), to squeeze the best quality I can get out of my source material before transferring it to the phone. Because Handbrake doesn't have to try to decode and re-scale the video in real time, and gives you fine control over the bitrate it will use, it can produce a video optimized for the phone that will, in fact, surpass the quality you would get by trying to run the native source video on the device.
Unless I misread earlier posts, or he wasn't very clear...
I believe this is what jakiman was talking about.
What you outlined is what most folks do... Problem is...
Devices like SGSII for e.g, will handle higher A/V bit-rates* for their res than the N9.
But then I guess you eventually get to a point of diminishing returns anyway.

*or just better (more efficient) CODECS

Originally Posted by olympus View Post
Wait, my 2yrs old n900 can now play 720p videos and n9 can't? That's kinda hilarious, isn't it?
Did you read Copernicus's post? It's not as simple as "720p = l337".
You want native res but at the highest bit-rate (or most efficient codec) your ph can handle.
If a ph can re-encode to perfect parameters on-the-fly & not even blink awesome, but I doubt many can.

I'd rather have good source material that I can re-encode exactly the way I want.
Then again I'm not inclined to be "leeching" heaps of content off the net.
In that scenario I guess "Begger's can't always be choosers".

That N900 720p playback you speak of was a very recent development.
As I understand it, it was possible thanks to files that originated from the N9/N950.
All it does is help the N900 do what the N9 does now...

Hopefully we'll eventually be able to OC the N9 to a point whereby it'll handle the most challenging formats.
The N9's OMAP3630 is basically a OMAP3430 die-shrunk to 45nm.
It's CPU/GPU/DSP's are clocked higher, & will have room for OC'ing beyond the N900's stable limits.

Last edited by jalyst; 2011-10-25 at 17:08.
 
Posts: 380 | Thanked: 459 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Slovenia
#42
Originally Posted by patlak View Post
You are hilarious!
I truly am because i'm willing to buy this device despite all the shortcomings it has.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to olympus For This Useful Post:
Posts: 435 | Thanked: 197 times | Joined on Feb 2010
#43
Originally Posted by olympus View Post
I truly am because i'm willing to buy this device despite all the shortcomings it has.
100% agreed with you...
Specially watching how it's made ! So sexy...lol
 

The Following User Says Thank You to IsaacDFP For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,033 | Thanked: 1,013 times | Joined on Jan 2010
#44
Originally Posted by olympus View Post
I truly am because i'm willing to buy this device despite all the shortcomings it has.
You are hilarious in the sense that you have no idea what you are talking about concerning 720p. Your N900 is playing 720p thanks to the N9/N950.
 
Moderator | Posts: 5,320 | Thanked: 4,464 times | Joined on Oct 2009
#45
^ beat me to it before I could edit my post
 
Helmuth's Avatar
Posts: 1,259 | Thanked: 1,341 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Germany
#46
Okay, this Thread is perhaps the best place for some kind of advertising. The Codec is important, yes, but more important (because we are all able to reencode our videos) is how the video player handles our videos:

I would prefer a possibility to continue videoplayback while checking twitter, so please vote at the nokia ideas project:

Those are not my ideas. But I can feel their pain. At Idea 3 I would personally prefer buttons like at Panucci with a fixed index to jump, but a gestue would be also a working solution.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Helmuth For This Useful Post:
Posts: 380 | Thanked: 459 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Slovenia
#47
Originally Posted by patlak View Post
You are hilarious in the sense that you have no idea what you are talking about concerning 720p. Your N900 is playing 720p thanks to the N9/N950.
Very well but that doesn't change THE fact.
 
Posts: 1,033 | Thanked: 1,013 times | Joined on Jan 2010
#48
Originally Posted by olympus View Post
Very well but that doesn't change THE fact.
What fact? That both play 720p equally or the one where Nokia already announced that a Harmattan device will feature an OMAP 3?
 
Posts: 343 | Thanked: 819 times | Joined on Jan 2010 @ Paris, France
#49
fwiw I have read on konttori blog that for PR1.2 the H264 has decoder enhancements
that means better but that does not mean that everybody will be happy then!
 

The Following User Says Thank You to P@t For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,427 | Thanked: 2,077 times | Joined on Aug 2009 @ Sydney
#50
Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
A couple things to note: first, the "High-Definition" in HD video relates to the picture resolution, not the video compression bitrate. Indeed, a 720p HD video is still called a High-Definition video whether it is severely compressed to the point of unwatchability or totally uncompressed. (Most of the HD video I find on the net has a bitrate lower than DVDs!)

Second, the resolution of an LCD screen is fixed. If your screen has 854x480 pixels, you will be watching video at 854x480 resolution. A 720p (1280x720 pixel) or 1080p (1920x1080) video shown on this screen will obviously have to be down-scaled, or you'll only be able to see one corner of the picture at a time. Similarly, a 640x350 video will have to be up-scaled, or you will be seeing a tiny picture on just a part of your screen. All this down-scaling (or up-scaling) wastes CPU power (or whatever hardware you are using), and must naturally distort the native video to some degree.

What you want is a maximum quality picture with minimum distortion. Simply cramming data onto the machine that is inevitably going to be thrown away during the down-scaling process is not the best way to do this. The best way is to use a video encoding system to re-encode a high-resolution, low compression source video into the native resolution of your device at the lowest compression level (or highest bitrate) that your device can handle.

Again, I use handbrake for this. I use it both for the HD videos I get from the net (high-res, but heavily compressed) and for my library of DVDs (standard-def, but low compression), to squeeze the best quality I can get out of my source material before transferring it to the phone. Because Handbrake doesn't have to try to decode and re-scale the video in real time, and gives you fine control over the bitrate it will use, it can produce a video optimized for the phone that will, in fact, surpass the quality you would get by trying to run the native source video on the device.
Please, I know this information quite well. No need to explain what HD is to me as if I don't know what it means. =P I guess you didn't read my post properly or just ignored it. I was talking about playing back commonly downloadable videos from the net. I gave Youtube example as that is a VERY common source for many.

1. Go to youtube
2. Find a video i want to play on N9
3. Download it (using some app on phone or PC etc)
4. Watch it

Now, on the N9, either I have to settle with crappier quality video as N9 cannot play HD or higher version. (as they are H264 high profile) So I have to download the higher quality video/audio and encode it for N9 to get the best of what youtube offers. I told you that Youtube HD video isn't just about resolution. It also has more resolvable detail and better quality audio which is retained no matter if your phone has less than HD resolution display.

Now compare this to SGS2 for example. I can just play 720p or 1080p video from youtube without wasting a single minute or having to settle with lower quality video and audio. Which do you prefer? N9? I don't want maximum quality picture with minimum distortion when I have to waste time to encode my videos before being able to copy it on to my phone. Why do that when you can get just simply copy the high resolution, high bitrate "original" video and just play it without "recompressing" the video to a lower bitrate, lower resolution video on some other phone? (Heck, SGS2 or many others can just play them directly from the youtube website)

It also avoids me having 2 copies of the same video and waste more space on my PC.

Also, encoded version can never surpass the source. Re-scaling using a dedicated DSP does just as good of a job also. You will not see a single difference. I know what you are trying to say and sounds good in theory. But in practice, the difference is negligible or not even visible. (not on a tiny mobile phone screen size that's for sure)

Anyways, just saying that N9 is a crappy video player for many people's needs right now. It's less capable and less convenient with barely no features than current competition unfortunately. (I was quite glad however to find out the dev at least implemented fill screen option using pinch-to-zoom)

Last edited by jakiman; 2011-10-25 at 22:05.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to jakiman For This Useful Post:
Reply


 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:18.