|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Video Quality |
| 1-33 of 33 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 10-22-10 04:53pm - 5137 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Goldfish (0)
Active User  Posts: 265 Registered: Jan 19, '08 Location: Boston, MA |
Video Quality Do you consider video quality before joining a site? I wanted to free up some disk space so I recently went through my porn collection to prune out video clips I rarely watched or was bored with. I sort my collection into folders by the site I downloaded them from. I found I have become intolerant of video of a certain quality and ended up deleting whole folders based on video quality. Going forward, I think 640/720 x 480 at 2000k bit rate will be the bottom end threshold in video quality for me when I subscribe to a site. All sites will have older content of course but the new stuff will have to make the cut-off. | |
|
||
| 10-22-10 05:57pm - 5137 days | #2 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User  Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Honestly I'm leaning more and more toward streaming video these days, but I'm usually disinclined to join a site that doesn't at least offer 720p video (1280x720) at a high quality variable bit rate. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-22-10 07:38pm - 5137 days | #3 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I think 640x480 is more than acceptable for me. I agree that higher quality is better but having grown up watching porn made in the 70's than I guess I can live with less than stellar video qualtity. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-24-10 08:54am - 5135 days | #4 | |
|
mbaya (0)
Suspended  Posts: 891 Registered: Jul 07, '08 Location: new jersey |
Hi Pat, I definitely consider quality to be of top importance. I have a 40 inch HD screen to watch on. Lower quality than HD looks really weak. A lot depends on your screen. For me even 640x480 is poor and often even grainy. | |
|
||
| 10-24-10 09:17am - 5135 days | #5 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
I agree with you and did exactly what you did only recently. Those old videos just don't look good on a modern wide screen monitor. 640x480 (or lower) videos with a total bitrate of around a 1000 are no longer enjoyable when viewed on today's machines. I did the same with my 800x600px picture sets even though they contained many sets I had marked "favorite" at the time. I am just not sentimental enough to put up with crappy quality, at least when looked at through today's eyes. | |
|
||
| 10-24-10 10:54am - 5135 days | #6 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
My choice of video quality is not based on anything except in allowing me the abilkity to download as much porn in a month as I can. as I've stated in the past. I'm limited to 100G per month and a video in HD can easily be as high as 2G and that would mean that I'd be limited to less than 50 videos in one month. I'm still joining new sites as well as being a long term member on a couple of other so I'd go over my alloted quota and I'd have to pay way too much for those extra Gigs. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-24-10 11:44am - 5135 days | #7 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User  Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
I'm different, I guess. I don't mind even 320 stuff if it's a babe I really like and who has retired or is not releasing new stuff. What I've been doing recently is downloading the lower quality stuff so I can watch and see if a video is worth keeping. If it is, I'll consider downloading the HD version. | |
|
||
| 10-24-10 05:53pm - 5135 days | #8 | |
|
Goldfish (0)
Active User Posts: 265 Registered: Jan 19, '08 Location: Boston, MA |
Some sub-HD quality video isn't too bad. The videos I've downloaded from VideoBox last time around was 720x480 at close to a 5k bitrate. HD is optimal for me as well but I'll go a bit lower for "minimal" standards. | |
|
||
| 10-24-10 05:56pm - 5135 days | #9 | |
|
Goldfish (0)
Active User Posts: 265 Registered: Jan 19, '08 Location: Boston, MA |
Monahan, Do you have a modern HD monitor? If you don't then older video probably will look fine. On HD monitors a lot of the imperfections in those low res videos are revealed and make the picture look grainy. | |
|
||
| 10-24-10 06:00pm - 5135 days | #10 | |
|
aydauanhoi (0)
Active User Posts: 1 Registered: Oct 24, '10 Location: haoi |
 | |
|
||
| 10-24-10 07:29pm - 5135 days | #11 | |
|
GCode (0)
Active User  Posts: 386 Registered: Feb 23, '09 Location: USA |
I take video size and clarity in to account as pretty much the deal maker (or breaker) with only content type as the other mediating factor. Photo size and clarity plays a part but I find myself caring less and less about photos lately. I really want the latest vids to be at least 720p if the price is the standard $29.95. 640 X 480 is the least I'll go and I take in to consideration of the price when it's at this res. Basically, I'll prolly join a site at $19.95 with 640 X 480 rather than a site at $29.95 at this size... Sexted From My iPad | |
|
||
| 10-26-10 08:02am - 5133 days | #12 | |
|
Denner (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,217 Registered: Mar 03, '07 Location: Denmark |
Video quality is becoming more and more essential before I join a new site. (Some of the better known sites - you already know about their standards) And maybe the main thing is the video viewing quality - and I'm trying to stay away from sites with only those monster file sizes at about 1,5 up to 4 or even 5 Gb - hates those - and they are NOT needed for good viewing quality. You can get 640/480 in damn fine quality (viewing), but if they keep down the size of a file in a 1280/720 I'm happy, too.... But bottom line: If you can get a fine/decent viewing quality for a 20 minutes vid at about 3-500 Mb - why go to 1,5-4 Gb? - the time for download, plus the use of space... "I don't drink anymore - I freeze it, and eat it like a popcicle" | |
|
||
| 10-27-10 12:30am - 5132 days | #13 | |
|
slutty (0)
Active User Posts: 475 Registered: Mar 02, '09 Location: Pennsylvania |
video quality is sort of important, and frame size is pretty bogus these days. there are sites that encode video at 1280x720 in order to say that is HD with either poor source or poor bitrate to make the frame size irrelevent. if the encoding is decent and looks good on my laptop and acceptable on my TV i am fine with that. i have many older videos that are 640x480 and <2000 kbps that still look fine to me. i have also found that higher quality TVs do a much better job of making sub-par video source look decent. i'm not really a fan of the super high quality HD stuff that is like 4 gigs per video, takes up too much space and too long to download and often doesn't look that much better to me than one that is 1/3 the size but encoded well. Bunny Lebowski: I'll suck your cock for a thousand dollars. Brandt: Ah hahahahaha! Wonderful woman. We're all, we're all very fond of her. Very free-spirited. | |
|
||
| 10-27-10 03:44am - 5132 days | #14 | |
|
Ed2009 (0)
Suspended Webmaster  Posts: 509 Registered: Sep 12, '09 Location: Wales, UK |
To me it seems that most of my members' reservations about HD are down to filesize. Lots of members are still on 2Mb/s connections (and of course ADSL rarely achieves max speed) so to download a multi-gig file isn't really practical. I don't post anything less than DVD res (720x576) now on my sites now, but apart from a couple of technology tests I haven't made the move to HD either. I've got to solve storage and archiving problems first. I'm already overloaded with backup DVDs (and BRDs are WAY too expensive) - the move to HD will make the original masters hard to manage, and really slow everything down (file copying, rendering etc.) I suspect when I move over to HD I will have to raise my membership fees too to cover the increased cost, and I'm not keen on doing that. Webmaster of StripGameCentral and A Measure of Curiosity. | |
|
||
| 10-27-10 09:41am - 5132 days | #15 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
Ed, as a consumer I'm 100% with you. While I like the quality of HD, I like the d/l speed and the lower sizes of 720 stuff, which are plenty good for me. I consider 720 to be optimal for the reasons you stated and will only go for higher resolution stuff when technology improves such that the download speeds are reasonable and the storage media is either solid state or cheap enough that it's worth storing a 1.0+ Gb size file. | |
|
||
| 10-27-10 02:00pm - 5132 days | #16 | |
|
Goldfish (0)
Active User Posts: 265 Registered: Jan 19, '08 Location: Boston, MA |
I agree with those who say file size is a factor. Files can get too large at any resolution. I think 0.9-1.2 GB is fine for a decent HD clip. Any larger and it becomes cumbersome. | |
|
||
| 11-02-10 02:05am - 5126 days | #18 | |
|
shooterbo (0)
Active User  Posts: 185 Registered: Apr 25, '07 |
If I try to playback newer videos that run over 3000K, my Windows Media Player 11 stutters and stammers and plays in slow motion, etc. I don't know why. | |
|
||
| 11-02-10 11:01pm - 5125 days | #19 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
| |
|
||
| 11-08-10 09:10pm - 5119 days | #20 | |
|
dalars (0)
Active User Posts: 8 Registered: Apr 25, '10 Location: LA, ca |
If there is no HD download then I will not join a site. Once you go HD, you never go back. After seeing my first babes in HD (that tall dark brunette DA on Law and order) I started my hunt for HD babes and deleted ALL my standard def material. Frame size is irrelevant. If it is shot in HD and has a good data rate then it will play fine in full screen (I have a 36" monitor)and look great. Full 1080 HD files are enormous and take too long to download. A 720 frame at 3000K plus and you will have good stuff. | |
|
||
| 11-08-10 10:25pm - 5119 days | #21 | |
|
RagingBuddhist (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 893 Registered: Jan 23, '07 |
I'd say it's more likely an underpowered CPU and/or not enough memory. I have files that won't play on my laptop but played just fine on my (now defunct) desktop. Sarcasm is a body's natural defense against stupidity. | |
|
||
| 11-08-10 11:17pm - 5119 days | #22 | |
|
slutty (0)
Active User Posts: 475 Registered: Mar 02, '09 Location: Pennsylvania |
In my experience a good GPU is usually far more important than a good CPU in playing video. I had a terribly slow CPU in my old computer that did fine playing good quality video because it had a decent graphics card. A lot of the bottom of the barrel computers you buy these days have reasonable processors, but terrible video cards. My fiance has such a computer. I agree on the RAM front, this can definitely cause problems with large files if you don't have enough - it is easy enough to look at the system performance in the task manager to see if that is the issue. Bunny Lebowski: I'll suck your cock for a thousand dollars. Brandt: Ah hahahahaha! Wonderful woman. We're all, we're all very fond of her. Very free-spirited. | |
|
||
| 11-09-10 12:45pm - 5119 days | #23 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
Quality is a god place to start, then content and star quality Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 08-06-11 08:39am - 4849 days | #24 | |
|
manholelover (0)
Active User  Posts: 37 Registered: Jun 17, '11 Location: London, UK |
Being relatively new to PU, I don't know how to find out the resolution of the videos or photos e.g 640 etc. I don't even really know what it means. It would be really useful for me to know for the reviews, as the comments I keep getting back ask me to put more detail re. content. I've tried right clicking on vids etc, but it doesn't really tell me. Any tips? | |
|
||
| 08-06-11 08:47am - 4849 days | #25 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
^Lets say you have a video on your computer. All you have to do is right click on the video and scroll down to the properties section. The info on the video is in the details section of properties. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 08-06-11 09:02am - 4849 days | #26 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended  Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
As Pat says, generally it's easy to find out the size of pics or the resolution (basically size) of vids. If you can't find properties if you right click while viewing, try opening "my computer" and right click on the file name of the video/pic in question. From there you should see a tab for "summary". If you click that it'll give you the size of the pic or vid. Somewhere around here I have a link to a handy share-ware utility the TBP Editors use for vids that gives any kind of spec you could want for the vid (resolution, bit rate, encoding type, etc) ... if you folks are interested, I'll try to dig up the link. But try the right-click first, I think that'll give you what you want. Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 08-06-11 09:23am - 4849 days | #27 | |
|
exotics4me (0)
Active User  Posts: 664 Registered: Jan 12, '07 Location: USA |
Another easy way to find out the video properties is to open a video in VLC player, click Tool--->Codec Information. Then I think there are 3-4 tabs you can click and it brings up almost all the video information. I've found this method works better with .mp4, .mkv and rarer video formats. Though it still often doesn't list the bitrate, but does the resolution. My first time I jacked off, I thought I'd invented it. I looked down at my sloppy handful of junk and thought, This is going to make me rich. - Chuck Palahniuk | |
|
||
| 08-06-11 07:03pm - 4849 days | #28 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Talking about the VLC Player, I just re-installed it to my new computer because it's the only media player that allows me to sharpen the picture but for some reason I cannot remember how to tweak it so it displays the extended controls when I switch to full picture. As long as the picture is windowed all the controls are there but in full I only get the basics. Can you help, exotics??? | |
|
||
| 08-06-11 10:34pm - 4848 days | #29 | |
|
exotics4me (0)
Active User Posts: 664 Registered: Jan 12, '07 Location: USA |
That's one feature I haven't used much. I do know there are two different types of fullscreen viewers in VLC. One can be reached by just double-clicking the video while playing. The other is reached by pressing F11 during playback. I believe that F11 one is the one you're looking for, it's not a big change from the windowed version with the controls, but it is a noticeable change and removes the top taskbar. There is an option to check also in one of the menus. In the windowed version right click on the video while it's playing, go to "view" and there is an option for "fullscreen interface" and it shows the F11 hotkey described above. Also clicking it from the menu does the same as just pushing F11. Try that out and see if that fixes it. My first time I jacked off, I thought I'd invented it. I looked down at my sloppy handful of junk and thought, This is going to make me rich. - Chuck Palahniuk | |
|
||
| 08-07-11 12:58pm - 4848 days | #30 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
^ Thanks, exotics. I did try the F11 but it is not what I am looking for. Maybe my memory is letting me down and "Full" never featured all of the controls.  | |
|
||
| 08-14-11 05:05pm - 4841 days | #31 | |
|
Mark123 (0)
Active User Posts: 9 Registered: May 04, '10 Location: United States |
Quality is definately important to me. Nothing is more frustrating than finding a great video content wise but the video quality itself is bad. For example, I had joined Teen Sex Mania and in one of the sites included, 18 First Sex there is a video with the model Katrina having sex on a beach. It would be one of my favorie videos of all but the picture quality was poor. I assume it was the best they could do at that time on the internet [I don't recall how old the video was]. What is frustrating is surely the original video quality they shot it in is better than what is shown on the internet, can't they go back and re-upload it with better quality? | |
|
||
| 08-15-11 12:37am - 4840 days | #32 | |
|
pinkerton (0)
Active User  Posts: 151 Registered: Jan 13, '07 Location: UK |
The other factor that's not been mentioned with respect to video quality is the bit-rate and this needs to increase with the large video sizes otherwise you get grainy video or "jaggies". I've found that a 1280x720 video encoded at around 2600Kbps looks okay, some sites encode at around 4000Kbps, but then some sizes encode at around 8000Kbps which seems a major waste and results in huge file sizes. In Windows media player you can check video bitrate in the File->Properties dialog. | |
|
||
| 08-29-11 05:24pm - 4826 days | #33 | |
|
Ed2009 (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 509 Registered: Sep 12, '09 Location: Wales, UK |
I usually encode 1280x720 at 2800Kbps (which looks perfect in most situations I find), but for FullHD (1920x1080) I increase that to 6000Kbps, more than that rarely yields any benefit to the picture quality. Webmaster of StripGameCentral and A Measure of Curiosity. | |
|
||
| 09-14-11 02:28am - 4810 days | #34 | |
|
bibo (0)
Suspended Posts: 179 Registered: Sep 16, '10 Location: GER |
I don't join a site that doesn't have a minimum of 1280*720 videos. In fact, I'm getting picky with sites that don't have fullHD videos. This is 2011, hdd space is cheap as f*** and high speed internet connections are the norm. Downloading a fullHD clip takes me about as long as it took to download a 100mb file in the 90ies. How sites are even able to survive with 640* or even 320* videos these days is beyond me. | |
|
||
| 1-33 of 33 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
