LuLa Video's quality (Thanks Luminous Landscape

[Pete Berry]

Happy to hear this.  The LuLa team is trying really hard to present good content and information.  We hope you like the new Leica series and the next Shooting With The Masters is just about ready to go.

Now that I am done an extensive few months of heavy travel I am doing catch up mode and finishing a lot of content on a lot of things I hope everyone finds interest is.  The forum is a great place to share and learn.  It's only as good as those that contribute.  So, all you lurkers out there, join in, please. And, to all of you, that participate in this forum regularly, thank you.

Welcome back Kevin, and I've thoroughly enjoyed your images shared!

Now, about the videos, which I have visited only infrequently, and for a reason. Isn't it time, in this unbelievably cheap data storage environment, to come into the present with at least 1080p quality rather than the slightly scuzzy 720p that leaves me rubbing my poor old eyes? The beautiful images just can't be truly appreciated on any screen with the 1MP output. Native 4K on a 1080p timeline - even better with 50% greater res. than native 1080 from DSLR/mirrorless bodies! THE premier imaging site deserves much better than truly antediluvian resolution for videos that would be sparkling if rendered to a higher standard.

Pete

[Christopher Sanderson]

...The beautiful images just can't be truly appreciated on any screen with the 1MP output. Native 4K on a 1080p timeline - even better with 50% greater res. than native 1080 from DSLR/mirrorless bodies! THE premier imaging site deserves much better than truly antediluvian resolution for videos that would be sparkling if rendered to a higher standard.

The actual resolution of 720P is the secondary part of the video delivery equation; the first and most important is the actual bitrate which is reasonable. Try viewing the stream at 1080 or full screen, it scales up very well. Incidentally the bitrate will 'scale' depending on your available bandwidth so you may or may not be getting the full resolution depending on your local environment. For the best resolution, I suggest downloading the actual video file and storing on your machine.

[Pete Berry]

The actual resolution of 720P is the secondary part of the video delivery equation; the first and most important is the actual bitrate which is reasonable. Try viewing the stream at 1080 or full screen, it scales up very well. Incidentally the bitrate will 'scale' depending on your available bandwidth so you may or may not be getting the full resolution depending on your local environment. For the best resolution, I suggest downloading the actual video file and storing on your machine.

Thanks for your reply, Chris. Yes, I watch full screen on my 24" 1080p monitor, through a 1Gbps Ethernet connection - bandwidth no problem. Are you shooting native 720p or down-sampling from 1080p or 4K? I assume that the rendered downloadable file is also 720p, so it's hard to believe that it would display any differently.

So I'm still confused: Are you saying that your very good 720p files are "good enough", or are there storage or other factors operative that prevent going to 1080p? No way around the fact that 720p is exactly 50% less than 1080p in possible linear resolution.

Pete

[Christopher Sanderson]

... Are you saying that your very good 720p files are "good enough", or are there storage or other factors operative that prevent going to 1080p? No way around the fact that 720p is exactly 50% less than 1080p in possible linear resolution.

I shoot 4k, export a 10 bit 4:2:2 4k master and then compress to 720P at a data rate of just over 6000 kbps. This is uploaded to our video server Wistia who create multiple derivatives from that file and serve out various bitrates depending on bandwidth availability.

Is this 'good enough'? I am uncertain, since for you and others perhaps it is insufficient. The 720P that I upload can be changed to 1080P at the same or higher bitrate and the top resolution available from Wistia would then be higher. Here is where the problem gets sticky since nothing is cost free. Would the final file that you see be any better and by how much? And rather importantly for us, what would be the amount of extra bandwidth charges Luminous Landscape would incur? We already pay quite high bandwidth charges for video alone and my suspicion would be that higher quality video would have to come at an increased subscription cost.

Perhaps soon we will try and experiment with short higher quality videos to see what the demand and cost would be. Hope this helps.

[Christopher Sanderson]

I should add that a 1080P file at the same datarate as the 720P would look no better since the compression would be relatively higher. The only way to get better resolution is to increase the datarate.

[Pete Berry]

I should add that a 1080P file at the same datarate as the 720P would look no better since the compression would be relatively higher. The only way to get better resolution is to increase the datarate.

Chris, the problem I see with this logic is that you seem to be assuming that the vast amount of color and gradation info in your 8.3MP 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 files can be translated to the vastly smaller 720p 0.9MB container, which will then be degraded by digitally zooming 50% to fill a 1080 screen. It seems to me a huge waste of hard to handle files! You will never get more than 720 L/PH resolution regardless of data rate. Plain old GH4/5 4K 30p 8-bit 4:2:0 @ 100Mbps rendered on a 1080p timeline at 16Mbps compression looks incredibly good, with full 1080 L/PH res possible, as demonstrated by Adam Wilts in his uber technical GH4 4K review, compared to approx. 700 lines with native 1080p before aliasing sets in: http://www.dvinfo.net/article/acquisition/micro-43/review-panasonic-dmc-gh4-camera.html/2.

Below are screen captures from a recent small project capturing distant Sandhill cranes at an EFL of 800mm: GH5 w/ adapted Canon 100-400-II @400mm, shot in 4K 60p and rendered in Cyberlink Power Director-16 in both 720 24p (top) and 1080 24p (below) - both in MPEG-4 at same 16Mbps compression. The 720 capture was re-sampled up 50% to 1080 using bicubic (plain, not smoother or sharper). Identical level adjustments made, no sharpening. 100% first image, 200% second.

[Christopher Sanderson]

So is your suggestion that we post 1080 files at the same datarate as the 720 files? If so, we can certainly give that a try.

[Pete Berry]

So is your suggestion that we post 1080 files at the same datarate as the 720 files? If so, we can certainly give that a try.

I look forward to that!

Here's a video from my Vimeo channel with GH4/Canon 100-400-II shot and rendered in 4K 30p . The difference between going from 1080p to 720p res. viewing in these very detailed hummingbirds is to me like a fine veil being drawn over the screen:

Pete

[Christopher Sanderson]

I don't know if you have been watching the Charlie Cramer series but when I post the videos to our Videos section (as opposed to the embedded-in-article), I will post all the videos in 1080.

Chris

[Pete Berry]

I don't know if you have been watching the Charlie Cramer series but when I post the videos to our Videos section (as opposed to the embedded-in-article), I will post all the videos in 1080.

Chris

Wow!! Thank you very much, Chris. My near 78 year old eyes will appreciate it greatly!
Pete

[Christopher Sanderson]

...Thank you very much, Chris....
Pete

No, thank you. I need a little prod every now and again. I was wrong.

From what I see on this end, 1080P at the same datarate as the 720P gives noticeably better resolution. Let's hope that resolution continues to show through the Wistia streaming process - I think it will.

Chris S

[Pete Berry]

You're very welcomed.

If we were comparing your 4K down-sampled 720p to native DSLR/mirrorless 1080p I don't think you would see much difference at all: your 720p should reach the full format res. of 720 L/PH, with the native 1080p about the same, as Wilts showed - about 50% less than the down-sampled 1080p, which is what I've been accustomed to looking at in my videos.

Pete

[Christopher Sanderson]

The published Charles Cramer videos are now in the Videos section.

For 1080P quality be sure to click on the Settings control - the geared wheel

[Pete Berry]

The published Charles Cramer videos are now in the Videos section.

For 1080P quality be sure to click on the Settings control - the geared wheel

A clear difference, that now sings! Hallelujah! I've live in the Monterey Peninsula/Carmel/Pebble Beach area, so I particularly look forward to sipping my evening toddy while enjoying the whole series in familiar settings with Kevin and Charles Cramer tonight.

Thanks again,
Pete