 | |  Netflix: Minecraft movies and tv shows!
--
"The relationship between what we see and what we know is never settled..." | |
|
guppy_fishPremium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| NextFlix PQ sux The Mpeg4 streams for broadcast quality are around 9mbs. To think one can get HD quailty at 3 let alone 1.8mbs is delusional.
Macro blocking, blurring on motion is what Netflix is selling, no thanks. I watched two movies and it was a horrible experience on the Netflix streaming, guess the masses don't know what HD really is | |
|
 | |
|  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: NextFlix PQ sux said by guppy_fish:The Mpeg4 streams for broadcast quality are around 9mbs. To think one can get HD quailty at 3 let alone 1.8mbs is delusional.
No it isn't - when many of the video streams are being viewed on 4 in. smartphones and 10" tablets. Compressed video is indistinguishable from higher quality streams. | |
|
| | | | Re: NextFlix PQ sux As someone who owns a 10" tegra2-based SoC tablet, I'll be the first to call that fallacy. I can EASILY tell the difference between a 1280x720 video with... say... a 5-6MBPS stream and a video encoded at 624x352 @ 1.1MBPS. | |
|
| |  Augustus IIIIf Only Rome Could See Us Now....
join:2001-01-25
Gainesville, GA | said by Romney2012:said by guppy_fish:The Mpeg4 streams for broadcast quality are around 9mbs. To think one can get HD quailty at 3 let alone 1.8mbs is delusional.
No it isn't - when many of the video streams are being viewed on 4 in. smartphones and 10" tablets. Compressed video is indistinguishable from higher quality streams. so what about us folks that use a 37" monitor? not tv, a monitor. you can see every pixelated pixel | |
|
| | | said by guppy_fish:The Mpeg4 streams for broadcast quality are around 9mbs. To think one can get HD quailty at 3 let alone 1.8mbs is delusional. Well, this is even WORSE than U-verse HD...& it's generally agreed that it's the WORST looking HD picture quality around.
BUT of course, that isn't stopping AT&T from getting new subs every day.
guess the masses don't know what HD really is
The sad fact is, I have been at many a clients home, explained to them where the HD channels are (depending on their provider of choice) & they sit there & flat out tell me "I can't tell the difference", or "it looks the same to me"...
Sigh.........   | |
|
| | | | Re: NextFlix PQ sux Don't forget the ever-classic-and-still-done-to-this-day take an SD channel, hit the stretch button, and call it HD; Then rationalize it or say they don't see the difference. | |
|
| | | |
| | | |  MichailPremium
join:2000-08-02
Boynton Beach, FL
kudos:1 | Re: NextFlix PQ sux said by tc1uscg:Wow. Sounds like a bunch of spoiled geeks around here  . Seems people are so used to having more then a cake to eat, how soon we forget what TV use to be like.
No sense in paying customers settling for less and not demanding better. Though Netflix does manage to look better than U-verse.
If this is an opt in setting it is a nice option for people with restricted bandwidth or caps. | |
|
| | | | | It doesn't help when local stations can't afford to upgrade their newsroom to full HD, so they buy widescreen SD cameras and repaint their set. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: NextFlix PQ sux Any news organization that can't afford a consumer HD video cam with SDI or even HDMI out should just pack it in and relay the network feed. | |
|
| | | Netflix streaming looks like an upscale. They're not even using H.264 right now - they're using Microsoft's inferior VC-1 codec.
It's going to get even worse now. I doubt this "eyeIO" crap can match H.264/AVC. | |
|
| |  GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:16 | Re: NextFlix PQ sux It looks like EyeIO *IS* h.264. That seems to be what this is all about; the quality improvements are mostly coming from them switching from VC-1 to h.264.
There is definitely a certain quality improvement to be had there, but it's nowhere near the 50% they're claiming... VC-1 isn't bad. It's better than ASP MPEG-4, but not as good as h.264, it's in between.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org | |
|
| | | | | Re: NextFlix PQ sux It's still going to be worse than the VC-1 @ 3.6 Mbps they're using now. H.264 is better than VC-1, but it's not twice as good. If they were using MPEG-2, then we'd be talking. Switching to H.264 but then cutting the bitrate in half is going to look like shit. If they kept the same bitrate there'd be a noticeable quality improvement. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: NextFlix PQ sux Well I've seen blue ray rips with x264 at about 1.8 - 2.0 Mbps and they look pretty good to me.
But x264 is superior to h264.
1080p no way but 720p I can believe. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | watice
join:2008-11-01
New York, NY | said by DataRiker:But x264 is superior to h264.
huh? same thing pretty much. | |
|
| | | | |  TPoise.NET Superstar
join:2006-07-03
united state | said by DataRiker:
But x264 is the superior h.264 AVC codec.
FIFY.
What Netflix needs is re-encode all of their stuff at the same bit rates in x264 and at half the bit rate. That would be their HQ and LQ settings. (Considering 3mbps in VC-1 is about the same quality as 1.5mbps in x264). | |
|
| | | | | | Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: NextFlix PQ sux said by TPoise:said by DataRiker:
But x264 is the superior h.264 AVC codec.
FIFY. Not so fast. Most of the profiles I use in x264 fall far outside the h.264 spec and are not compatible at all with h.264 hardware.
In fact, most of the rips I see on torrents these days aren't.
Having worked with numerous spec h.264 codecs I can tell you if you max out the settings in x264 ( typically insane profile) there is no comparison. | |
|
| | | | | | | GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:16 | Re: NextFlix PQ sux x264 is an h.264 encoder (technically not a codec since it doesn't decode). h.264 is a compression format. They're completely different things.
x264 is to Microsoft Word as h.264 is to a word document.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | Re: NextFlix PQ sux Yes and no.
People get this issue very confused. All codecs are used to encode video.
x264 is a codec/encoder and it can follow h.264 specifications, but if you want to the best quality then no technically its not a h.264 encoder. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
4 edits | Re: NextFlix PQ sux its a viewpoint and / or semantics.
x264 can create files that standard h264 hardware can not fully decode, yet most software decoders can. ( no surprise VLC )
At least this was the way it was explained on the VideoLan forums. | |
|
| Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
 ·DIRECTV
·Optimum Online
·Cablevision
1 edit | I know what HD is, I watch a lot of movies on blu-ray and subscribe to FIOS because their channels have much better PQ than cable company HD.
I am also a netflix subscriber, and while it's quite obvious that netflix "HD" is not quite HD, for $8 a month with unlimited streaming i enjoy it, I don't watch big blockbusters on it, mostly older tv shows and movies and the quality is acceptable, also remember that they have to build their service for what mainstream users can obtain over their internet connection, 5mbps the highest netflix streaming speed is near the max sustainable bitrate for many users.
That said 1.8mbps is definitely delusional, I do a lot of encoding of HD video and 4mbps is pretty much the lowest I'll go no matter how crazy I get with my x264 settings. But if the company offers better compression it could increase our 5 mbps stream quality, even now netflix has settings for the quality you want in relation to bandwidth usage, if they implement a better encoding technology with options like they currently have, if they do it right they can increase the quality of all streams based on the bandwidth you have available, or the bandwidth that you want to use if your on a capped plan.
Based on their prior efforts to help out capped users I think they will continue this effort to provide choices on quality vs bandwidth usage in order to improve the experience for customers.
So users like me (uncapped) will continue with the max quality setting and users concerned about bandwidth caps will be able to lower their bandwidth usage and improve the PQ of their streams at the given bandwidth speed they choose.
Seems like a win-win | |
|
 n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| Zero Sum Game I can pretty guarantee if Netflix is successful in reducing bandwidth consumption by 50 percent, the ISP's will lower their caps by 50 percent to make sure they still capture revenue. Heck, if you reduced it by 90 percent, they would cut their caps down 90 percent. The ISP's are not going to leave money on the table.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|
| openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Zero Sum Game I doubt it. That would be too blatantly disingenuous. It may drive more price increases for connections to the Internet. | |
|
| | Is new hardware/software required? Do these new CODECs require a new Roku or new TV set that has built in IP video streaming hardware/software or a software upgrade? Are these devices firmware upgradeable? | |
|
|  Morac
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
kudos:1
·Comcast
| Re: Is new hardware/software required? said by Streetlight:Do these new CODECs require a new Roku or new TV set that has built in IP video streaming hardware/software or a software upgrade? Are these devices firmware upgradeable?
It shouldn't require new hardware. Nearly every hardware device out there is capable of playing H.264 video (which is basically the "standard"). If your box can do YouTube (or any other H.264 encoded video), it will be able to do Netflix.
--
The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired. | |
|
|  pnjunctionTeksavvy ExtremePremium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1 | Yes devices like TVs and set-top boxes will probably need firmware upgrades, although netflix could keep backwards compatibility so that they can still provide the old formats to those devices.
Does make we wonder just how long manufacturer's of things like TVs are going to keep their firmwares up to date. They love to talk up their 'smart TVs' but are they really committed to supporting the software? Somehow I don't see these TVs getting updates past the 1st year. For myself I'll use an HTPC I know that it is down for whatever. Consoles are almost as good, they'll keep popular applications up to date, but not quite as flexible as the PC obviously. | |
|
| | Morac
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Is new hardware/software required? Read the post again. The resulting files are in standard H.264 format so no update will be needed. The "update" is on the encoding side. The encoder is supposedly "optimized" to provide better quality video and lower bit rates.
--
The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired. | |
|
| | | pnjunctionTeksavvy ExtremePremium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1 | Re: Is new hardware/software required? Yes but does the current version of netflix installed on the devices support the new streaming formats? I don't think it's a given that the current netflix clients will know what to do with the new formats.
Just because my computer can decode h264 doesn't mean my internal TV tuner for example will be able to access h264 channels without issue, right now the software is configured only for mpeg2 codecs it would need to be updated. | |
|
| | | | GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:16 | Re: Is new hardware/software required? Netflix uses HTML5 on WebKit for the interface, allowing them to self-update the user interface at the very least. They're already talking to the DSP to send it VC-1 data, who is to say that they didn't build in support for sending any supported compression format to the DSP? They may be able to do the switchover without any intervention by the hardware manufacturer being required.
After all, VC-1 isn't the first codec Netflix has used.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org | |
|
| | | | Too bad our "advanced" TV spec didn't require TVs to have updatable firmware.
Then again, it allows interlacing and doesn't even set resolution requirements for HD, so really why should we be surprised. | |
|
 lordfly
join:2000-10-12
Homestead, FL
 ·SkyNet360
 ·AT&T Southeast
| HD reality I am so glad that people complain about clarity of their movies. When you grow up starting with a B&W TV to a Color TV to so called hi-definition tubes to now hi-def LCD/LED or Plasma displays, it seems sort of surreal. Also, going through the video compression age where 160x120 was good and then 320x240 was better then 640x480 was awesome then 720x480 and now 720p and 1024p, etc, etc. I really don't see the point, literally. I can't tell the difference between one digital point and the next. I find myself going hi-res but with bigger fonts. I have gotten old. There are many other things to worry about than if so-and-so actor forgot to cover up their large pores before getting in front of the camera.
I hope I made some point during my ramble. | |
|
| rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: HD reality Well -- it depends on the size of the screen. (OK...yes...size does matter.) If you have a small TV, resolution doesn't make that much difference. If you have a wall-sized TV, resolution makes the difference between something you don't want to watch and something that's truly stunning. | |
|
| | | I don't know... I came up in the same era where we had 160x120, 320x240. Hell, for those of us who were producing VCDs... 352x240. 512x384, 640x480... I remember every incremental step. I know I see the difference - especially between 720p and 1080p (and higher). Hell, I've been known to walk into stores and (accurately) identify the connection type they're using to deliver an image from a source to a display at no less than 10 feet.
It's really not that difficult for me, but then again, on the other hand, you have some people who swear by not being able to tell the difference (in resolution) until they're at no more than 3 feet of distance from the display or those who swear by there being no discernible difference between 30fps and 60fps ("HA!")... or can't see clearly visible input latency on a display... | |
|
| nonymousPremium
join:2003-09-08
Glendale, AZ Reviews:
 ·Callcentric
| I am not that old. Color tvs had been around a long time. Still my parents were not buying one for my room when I was small. I got a 13 inch black and white tv. If you watch black and white long enough you start to imagine colors. | |
|
 PToN
join:2001-10-04
Houston, TX | Well I can tell the difference between 720p, 1080i, and 1080p and i can say that Netflix does an Ok job at delivering better looking videos.
You need to remember that the only device that i have heard to deliver Netflix "1080p" content is the PS3. All other devices only stream up to "720p" (last time i checked).
For example: I have Boxee Box and the "HD" that Netflix streams to it, doesnt get close to the quality seen on the same movie on the PS3. However, playing a 1080p rip on Boxee Box sure looks better than the highest "HD" Netflix can offer on the PS3.
But on Boxee Box and PS3, the quality offered is just good enough. | |
|
| |
| | |  Update on 1080p Devices!
said by PToN:I can tell the difference between 720p, 1080i, and 1080p and i can say that Netflix does an Ok job at delivering better looking videos.
You need to remember that the only device that i have heard to deliver Netflix "1080p" content is the PS3. All other devices only stream up to "720p" (last time i checked).
For example: I have Boxee Box and the "HD" that Netflix streams to it, doesnt get close to the quality seen on the same movie on the PS3. However, playing a 1080p rip on Boxee Box sure looks better than the highest "HD" Netflix can offer on the PS3.
But on Boxee Box and PS3, the quality offered is just good enough.
As some others posted below and above Netflix will stream 1080p to certain capable devices. Currently those devices have since been increased since the release when only the PS3 would play 1080p on Netflix. Currently the PS3, LG, Samsung and Western Digital devices will do 1080p on Netflix with 5.1 Dolby Digital and Subtitles. There are tests to see if your device is doing 1080p (Amadeus/Let the Right One In) and almost always if your device can do Subtitles and Dolby Digital 5.1 you can usually do 1080p steaming.
--
"The relationship between what we see and what we know is never settled..." | |
|
| | Oh god
I don't believe the hype. No codec can achieve adequate looking 720p at those bitrates. Even MPEG-4 needs at least 5 Mbps.
I guess I'll continue to not be a Netflix subscriber. | |
|
| | | Re: Oh god Seems like 25% of the movies are in the incorrect aspect ratio too, which is ridiculous. | |
|
| | Reviews:
·Hargray Cable
| Re: Oh god said by Wilsdom:Seems like 25% of the movies are in the incorrect aspect ratio too, which is ridiculous.
Just a thought. If you're talking about old movies that Netflix can probably only get them in 4:3 then you really don't have a point. I have DVDs that don't have wide screen because when they came out people just didn't have 16:9 screens. Same with and especially TV shows which weren't shot in high res since the last few years.
An example. I was watching Miami Vice on Hulu which in it's day was a visual show, on a HDTV it really doesn't look good and there is not much that can be done it wasn't shot originally in that high of resolution. At the time I think a big TV was around 24-26 inches and DVDs weren't even invented yet. | |
|
| | | mworks
join:2006-06-13
Faison, NC | Re: Oh god The max resolution for older content is 480 vertical lines for NTSC. The content was shot on film with a much higher resolution then scaled down to fit the format. That is why you can have bluray versions of some older content coming out with improved quality. The problem is that a lot of the older content that was shot on film , the films were either thrown out or destroyed and only the 480 line version remains. | |
|
| | | | | I mean they are stretched. Sometimes you can even see the Netflix monkey switch between settings a couple of times during the movie, inevitably choosing the wrong one. | |
|
KC
join:2006-11-08
Ottawa, ON |  This is good news for Canadian!
Besides, if the Big 3 in Canada catch wind of this, they will just
lower the cap,
bump the cost and
cry congestion...
| |
|
| | | Re: This is good news for Canadian! I just got back from Malaysia.
I had a 2.0Mbps but it only was stable(with tons of DNS issues) less then 1Mbps. I was able to use a VPN with OpenVpn and I had no problem using Netflix.
But, I do have to say that was on a 15inch lcd screen on my laptop, a tv might be different. | |
|
 Boomer86never say roadkillPremium
join:2002-10-18
Walden, NY | How about at lower speeds? I'm using Netflix over 1.5 MBPS TWC narrowband; the quality isn't great but considering the cost of the service it has been acceptable on our 37" 720P LCD. Would I notice an improvement using last year's model Roku HDX?
--
I turned on my computer for this? | |
|
poolek
join:2003-11-04
Austin, TX Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
| Looks good to me I don't have too many complaints about current netflix HD quality. I'm using a 42" tv, sitting 6-8 feet away. I stream netflix primarily through my original Roku, which is limited to 720p.
For comparison, I have a dedicated win7 WMC HTPC for OTA broadcast, and a blu ray player.
I'd rank the quality as follows:
5. SD OTA
4. DVD
3. Netflix HD
2. Broadcast HD
1. Blu ray
It's not perfect, but beats getting off the couch to rent a blu ray. And if more compression means I get the same pq and less "buffering" or reverting to SD streams (despite a 30mb stable connection and a hardwire connection to the router), then I'm all for it. | |
|
mworks
join:2006-06-13
Faison, NC | The encoder and the people encoding make the difference Who does the encoding and the method used is what makes the difference. You can have a great encoder and set it for generic settings and turn out terrible looking video. I'm guessing that netflix uses a mass encoding approach which is not the best way to encode video. The best way is to take the content , divide up scenes based on the needs of those scenes and set the encoder appropriately . That is the process used in bluray releases of major films. Studios have people that sit and watch the output from the encoder and adjust the settings to get the best possible output for the frames they are viewing. They may have to watch the same segments 20 times , talk about a boring job. I can't imagine having to sit and watch the same minute of a film over and over, especially if you hate the film . We can't expect netflix to go to that extreme though. | |
|
| | Sheesh I don't know what all of you people are complaining about...I stream netflix through a PS3 hard wired into my router, and I have a 46" Samsung UN46D6300 and the picture quality is amazing. It's a fantastic TV, but the picture quality when netflix is streaming in high or x-high is almost as good as blu ray. Also, older movies (late 80's and 90's) look fantastic (almost as good as new movies). I cannot see motion blur or artifacts from compression. I'm sure it has a lot to do with the TV. My friends always compliment on how good the picture is. Dish network HD also looks fantastic. I would recommend a Samsung LED tv to anyone. | |
|
| | | Re: Sheesh I'm with you joshuaren, Netflix quality on my samsung (same model as yours) is quite good. I have OTA HD and I get similar results in my opinion when comparing to Netflix | |
|
| | Good thing there's the first month free. Even if Netflix Canada was free i wouldn't subscribe to it. The content is worst than a bad joke. The Netflix company should be ashamed of themselves for trying to inflict something like this on Canadians. | |
|
|
|
. I would like to do the above without worry I'm going over my 250gb cap. SD/HD. It all looks the same these days anyway. 
