2009-05-16, 11:38
digitalhigh Wrote:I would say that based on the information given in that article, a rating system would be a very cool possibility. That's a pretty nice range of resolutions and bitrates...it wouldn't be hard at all to use that kind of criteria to classify stuff. IDK if this contradicts what you were saying too badly, Jivetalker. According to those standards, it would be pretty easy to identify said media based on the content, although poor conversion/compression would still throw a wrench into the works.
I think it would be an interesting exercise to see what figure is allocated to each clip but I'm still not sure the figure would be meaningful. Anything with fast movement or lots of camera changes will require higher bitrates to look good.
For example, if I were to compare 2 movies - one is a romcom/chick flick and the other is an action blockbuster. If they were both at the same resolution (perhaps 720P) and both ran for the same duration (say 90 minutes) then I would expect the file for the romcom to be around 4.3GB and the file for the action movie to be at least 6GB.
If there is little movement and infrequent camera changes then you can still get a very good image at a fairly low bitrate. I'm sure that a well lit studio chatshow with a bitrate that is 1/4 of the bitrate of an action movie would provide a higher quality image.
Personally, I view my movies on a 720P projector so any resolutions higher than that are downscaled so for me 1280x 720 is the optimal resolution. One day I'll probably get a 1080P projector then my standards will be different.
I guess a 1080p video ripped direct from bluray might rate at the top of your scale but it wouldn't playback well unless you have a very powerful pc. Matroska 720P files do seem to be the best compromise on a medium spec pc, especially as many people are playing back with displays that don't go wider than 1280 pixels.