lud

joined 1 year ago
[–] lud@lemm.ee 18 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

You can read more about why and how it was made here: https://www.svt.se/open/en/content/

The only place I could find where I could kinda play the video is inside Davinci resolve, but it doesn't look how I would like it to. Probably due to the apparent lack of HDR support in Resolve on Windows (unless you have a separate TV connected to the PC somehow.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Here: https://www.svt.se/open/en/content/

I downloaded "natural complexity" or something like that. Unfortunately FTP downloads are limited to 100 Mbit/s so downloads can take a while. Imo they should make a torrent.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 13 points 6 months ago (2 children)

If you look up the dependencies or legal notices for anything that does anything related to video, audio or maybe even images, it's very likely that it uses ffmpeg in some way.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 57 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (22 children)

I just discovered something that VLC REALLY didn't like to play. A 4K50fps JPEG2000 YUV444 12bit lossless ~48 GB video that was only 1 minute long.

To be fair the bitrate of the video is insane at ~5700 Mbit/s. The bitrate is so insane that you should really consider using an NVME drive for playback.

MPC-HC could kinda play it but only with extreme stutter and lag. My CPU (Ryzen 9 5900x) was completely maxed out.

I think you need hardware acceleration for a video like this.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I searched and I may have misremembered, the free version seems to have been around since the start except that the free version was initially invite and desktop only. Eventually everyone could use it but still only on desktop. The free version was even more limited back then it seems with a limit on how many hours you could listen to each month.

I could personally never use it. Because it was so incredibly limited. Not being allowed to skip tracks makes it unusable and I'm genuinely surprised anyone used it apart from trying the service.

I have a faint memory of it being announced that Spotify first got a free tier but I may be completely wrong, I was very young back then. I'm also from Sweden so we had Spotify very early compared to most countries and it got popular very quickly here.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Because they need to pay their supplier of synced (and non-synced) lyrics, Musixmatch.

And they obviously want to make money and free users don't make them much if any profit.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 98 points 6 months ago (21 children)

Really who cares? The free tier is shit and has always been shit. That's the point of the free tier, to get you to pay.

Previously they didn't even have a free tier, now they do and it's free. Of course not every feature exists and especially not a feature like lyrics which isn't essential and Spotify has to pay extra for.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 0 points 7 months ago

Equal to the PS5? No. Equal to the Steam deck? Yeah I guess.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 3 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Faire enough. Judging by the reception most do like them though.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago (9 children)

Have you tried the new Zelda games.

view more: ‹ prev next ›