this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2025
461 points (92.3% liked)

Technology

76418 readers
2614 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 262 points 1 day ago (7 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.

[–] Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 hours ago

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

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 105 points 1 day 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

[–] makyo@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours 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 4 points 10 hours ago

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

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 38 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)

For most streaming? Yeah.

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

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 14 points 1 day ago

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

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 7 points 18 hours 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 4 points 18 hours 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.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] notfromhere@lemmy.ml 12 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I can still find 480p videos from when YouTube first started that rival the quality of the compressed crap “1080p” we get from YouTube today. It’s outrageous.

[–] IronKrill@lemmy.ca 7 points 22 hours ago

Sadly most of those older YouTube videos have been run through multiple re-comoressions and look so much worse than they did at upload. It's a major bummer.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day 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.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day 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.