Recommended Video Size and Frame Rate - Touch Pro2, Tilt 2 Windows Mobile General

I wanted to convert some video files for my TP2. Can anybody please help me with the recommended video size and frame rate? Thanks!

Im not an expert on this topic but...
since the TP2's Screen is 480x800 I guess thats the resolution you should convert to (in full screen, some clipping will occur if your footage is e.g. cinema 21:9 format), and framerate -imho- is the same as your original footage you want to downsize...
Which software do you use?
regards
AO

I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if the TP2 could decode 480x800 video at 30fps. Maybe in MPEG-2, but I doubt MPEG-4. Even the XBox CPU (733 mHz P-3) can barely handle 960x540 in MP4 (DivX or Xvid)
Ideally I'd recommend 720x480, which is NTSC DVD resolution, if the CPU can decode it. Then again, I'm from the US, and all I ever see is NTSC.

Related

h.264 or mpeg4?

What have people been experiencing in terms of Audio Video/Quality for mpeg4 at 720p/Mpeg4 800 x480 WVGA and H.264 (800 x480)WVGA formats?
From what I can gather its general consensus that 720p is utter crap, has fps skipping,grainy issues and looks worse then 800x480 WVGA
Kinda depends on your location. With good lighting, my mpeg4 view at 720p come out great. But as lighting goes down, so does clarity and FPS. Just record a minute of video with each option and see what looks best for you.

Video Glasses for the I9100...

Hi All!
Soo... Its nearly Christmas an my wife has asked what id like
My immediate reply was a pair of video glasses
I automatically presumed I'd be able to use it with my SGSII (with the HDMI video out n all)
So off I went googl'ing the hell out of them.
I cant seem to find any "directly" compatible so I was just wondering if any one had any ideas on the concept?
I want to be able to use them with my phone and my PS3.
Has any one had first hand experiences with them?
It's a lot of money to invest in something I've never had a play with
Here are a few I've looked at >
http://www.vuzix.com
http://www.videoglasses.org.uk
http://www.zetronix.com/index.php?cPath=26&gclid=CMCT6baW4awCFaEntAodSCgIoQ
http://www.tech-in-mind.com/product01_06_en.html
I don't need the VR option (unless its free lol )
Obviously I'm trying to do this as cheap a possible (For around £250 or less)
and I'm not too fussed if the screen is around the 40-50 inch range (again wouldn't say no to the 80 incher )
Please any advice on the matter would be greatly appreciated.
If it were me, I'd get something decent for Christmas.
The displays you are looking at have resolutions of 640x480 max and will look rubbish as a virtual 80in screen. If you have an HDTV then you'll be disappointed if you put a PS3 through any video glasses IMO. The cheaper end of the range have 320x240 displays and will look even worse.
Not only will VGA or QVGA resolution look very pixelated on an (virtual) 80"-diagonal, but also consider that most footage will need to be downscaled in order to fit these low resolutions. If you downscale 1080p or 720p videos they will look acceptable, but if you downscale PAL footage (720*576) to VGA (640*480) you will get a quite blurry result.
Btw the PS3 can natively output VGA-resolution if it's in NTSC-mode (see http://manuals.playstation.net/document/en/ps3/3_15/settings/videooutput.html), so it won't have that blurry-effect like downscaled PAL-footage, but it will still look pixelated.
Do get an idea of what to expect, just change your computer's resolution to 640*480 and go close to the screen.
inquisitor said:
Not only will VGA or QVGA resolution look very pixelated on an (virtual) 80"-diagonal, but also consider that most footage will need to be downscaled in order to fit these low resolutions. If you downscale 1080p or 720p videos they will look acceptable, but if you downscale PAL footage (720*576) to VGA (640*480) you will get a quite blurry result.
Btw the PS3 can natively output VGA-resolution if it's in NTSC-mode (see http://manuals.playstation.net/document/en/ps3/3_15/settings/videooutput.html), so it won't have that blurry-effect like downscaled PAL-footage, but it will still look pixelated.
Do get an idea of what to expect, just change your computer's resolution to 640*480 and go close to the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fair enough. I thought it was all relive to the actual screen size..
I had a friend that hadn't understood he needed to hook his PS3 up to his HD tv with a HDMI cable, The difference was astonishing. not what im after.
Thanks for your help guys. I hold off for now.

[Q] Video sizing

Any idea on the video size that would be used on this tablet? I usually rip backups of my BRs and just wanted to see if anyone has tried different video sizes as of yet. Would the 1200 x 1920 resolution be acceptable? Hoping to get this tablet delivered this week and would like to get some of my favorite movies transferred over.
The best quality will the 1080p rips but the files will be huge.
The 720p will be good as well and the files will be a bit smaller.
But even with DVD rips, the quality is OK, you won't just take advantage of superb screen of the G Pad (but you'll save a lot of storage).
But the best thing would be for you to test the different formats and see what suits you the best.

video shooting: UHD vs FHD quality

Hello guys,
help me to sort something out.
I made a UHD video and FHD video. Both fps are 30. My PC monitor is 1920x1080.
How can it be, that UHD video quality is much much better then FHD? I say so, because my monitor is with FHD resolution (so it cannot reproduce UHD fully) and frame rate is 30 on both videos, so the quality should be the same, right?
Or I do understand something wrong here ?
Thanks!
An UHD downscaled to FHD video will probably appear sharper than a native FHD video when being displayed on an FHD monitor.
That's not very strange, imho.
Because FULL HD has only 17Mbps bitrate whereas 4K in Marshmallow has 46Mpbs, in Lollipop 30Mpbs.

Question 4k video worth it over 1080p?

I have been doing some video recordings today and noticed how large the 4k 60fps videos are (about twice as larger as 1080p 60fps recordings).
So I went ahead and did some 1080p recording to compare 4k and 1080p on my 4k LG CX TV.
Tbh, I didn't notice much of a difference.
So I am really wondering if 4k is even worth it considering its file size?
It mostly just depends on the camera used. I guess you used your phone to record. right? Most phones can't do 4K properly, it's just a feature they advertise. If to you 1080p looks fine, I don't see why you would bother with 4K60. Or maybe just try 4K30, in some cases it does end up looking better than 4K60.
i mean twice the size for 4X the resolution is worth it
you need to take into account the finer details and edging in 4K which will show better results.
also most smart tvs including the CX have resolution scaling and other filters to make lower res content look better on 4K panels
also dont forget thats an Oled tv thats gonna look great with whatever you pump into it
Username: Required said:
It mostly just depends on the camera used. I guess you used your phone to record. right? Most phones can't do 4K properly, it's just a feature they advertise. If to you 1080p looks fine, I don't see why you would bother with 4K60. Or maybe just try 4K30, in some cases it does end up looking better than 4K60.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes ofcourse I used the phones camera The google pixel 6 pro camera.
Izy said:
i mean twice the size for 4X the resolution is worth it
you need to take into account the finer details and edging in 4K which will show better results.
also most smart tvs including the CX have resolution scaling and other filters to make lower res content look better on 4K panels
also dont forget thats an Oled tv thats gonna look great with whatever you pump into it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ye but if most TV's (or small screens like our smartphones, or any 1080p screen) won't really show a difference in quality, why even bother with the bigger file size. No one will realistically notice? :S
Utini said:
Ye but if most TV's (or small screens like our smartphones, or any 1080p screen) won't really show a difference in quality, why even bother with the bigger file size. No one will realistically notice? :S
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One advantage would be that you could theoretically crop or zoom the video and still retain acceptable quality on most resolutions on screens. Just like you said, it won't make a big difference on standard FHD displays however it would be noticeable when the video is cropped or zoomed.
Utini said:
Ye but if most TV's (or small screens like our smartphones, or any 1080p screen) won't really show a difference in quality, why even bother with the bigger file size. No one will realistically notice? :S
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i mean by that logic why watch 4k and get 4k tvs in first place. why have a higher res screen.
I mean why get the pro should have got the 1080p panel 6
Theres a lot of content 4K video will shine
even 4k video downsampled to 1080p retains better details than 1080p does.
Sure on a phone screen you wont see the difference but on a tv thats 55inch or higher the gap is noticeably wider its a major difference.
There will be parts you notice also more so. take into the account if you want to focus on specific parts of a video or edit / crop edit
also your content is future proofed
open all the images in seperate tabs to see full resolution.
the latter 2 are 50% res of the original screencaps you can easily see the details are maintained scaled down
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
scale down the content even more say 50% of the cropped image and its still noticeable difference
Izy said:
i mean by that logic why watch 4k and get 4k tvs in first place. why have a higher res screen.
I mean why get the pro should have got the 1080p panel 6
Theres a lot of content 4K video will shine
even 4k video downsampled to 1080p retains better details than 1080p does.
Sure on a phone screen you wont see the difference but on a tv thats 55inch or higher the gap is noticeably wider its a major difference.
There will be parts you notice also more so. take into the account if you want to focus on specific parts of a video or edit / crop edit
also your content is future proofed
open all the images in seperate tabs to see full resolution.
the latter 2 are 50% res of the original screencaps you can easily see the details are maintained scaled down
scale down the content even more say 50% of the cropped image and its still noticeable difference
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Real 4k movie content does look surely better on my 4k TV compared to a 1080p TV / content.
But that is real 4k movie material and not google pixel 6 pro 4k video content.
Are your screencaps from recordings done with the google pixel 6 pro?
Because I am talking only about the P6P recordings, not about anything recorder with smth else.
Utini said:
Real 4k movie content does look surely better on my 4k TV compared to a 1080p TV / content.
But that is real 4k movie material and not google pixel 6 pro 4k video content.
Are your screencaps from recordings done with the google pixel 6 pro?
Because I am talking only about the P6P recordings, not about anything recorder with smth else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no they were not but the point still stands it was just a prime example
regardless i literally did test videos of still objects in my spare room with text from a distance.
in poor lighting conditions its literally dark and the bulbs ****
literally even look at the portrait still in gallery before you even play the video you could see the text on objects was actually legible and also sharper
if you fail to even notice the difference between 1080 and 4k on your tv you may need your eyes checked.
dont forget theres literally rated seating distances for screen sizes, distant seated and also resolurion of display
the closer you are the better the fine details you see
did you stand up and look or did you sit down and look so you basically looking at like a 20inch display
Sounds like you putting the LG CX to waste
it was the exaxt same situation with people when hd 720p and 1080p came out they coudnt tell difference from sd
also people who think FHD and 4K dont make a difference are the type of people who think you can see above 60fps.
One of these is 4k downscaled the other is 1080p downscaled both also limited to poor lighting conditions
Izy said:
no they were not but the point still stands it was just a prime example
regardless i literally did test videos of still objects in my spare room with text from a distance.
in poor lighting conditions its literally dark and the bulbs ****
literally even look at the portrait still in gallery before you even play the video you could see the text on objects was actually legible and also sharper
if you fail to even notice the difference between 1080 and 4k on your tv you may need your eyes checked.
dont forget theres literally rated seating distances for screen sizes, distant seated and also resolurion of display
the closer you are the better the fine details you see
did you stand up and look or did you sit down and look so you basically looking at like a 20inch display
Sounds like you putting the LG CX to waste
it was the exaxt same situation with people when hd 720p and 1080p came out they coudnt tell difference from sd
also people who think FHD and 4K dont make a difference are the type of people who think you can see above 60fps.
One of these is 4k downscaled the other is 1080p downscaled both also limited to poor lighting conditions
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, then again: This is specific to the google pixel 6 pro.
Yes there is a difference between 4k and 1080p.
Yes there is a difference between 30hz,60hz,120hz.
But it also depends on the source equipment and how it is recorded.
I can use a **** camera to record a video in 4k but it won't look any better than 1080p due the camera being so bad. And this is exactly why I am asking this in regards to the google pixel 6 pro.
How good is the camera in videos really and how big is the difference with it in 4k vs 1080p.
Thanks, I know how to setup my TV. And due to my job I have to test my eyes every year.. still getting highest results :>
But if you can see a difference in the thumbnail of your image gallery, then the placebo is really strong with you.
And again:
There is a difference between 720p,1080p, and 4k.. but:
Utini said:
Okay, then again: This is specific to the google pixel 6 pro.
Yes there is a difference between 4k and 1080p.
Yes there is a difference between 30hz,60hz,120hz.
But it also depends on the source equipment and how it is recorded.
I can use a **** camera to record a video in 4k but it won't look any better than 1080p due the camera being so bad. And this is exactly why I am asking this in regards to the google pixel 6 pro.
How good is the camera in videos really and how big is the difference with it in 4k vs 1080p.
Thanks, I know how to setup my TV. And due to my job I have to test my eyes every year.. still getting highest results :>
But if you can see a difference in the thumbnail of your image gallery, then the placebo is really strong with you.
And again:
There is a difference between 720p,1080p, and 4k.. but:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most people who cannot notice a difference either have reduced vision or use a small monitor. I dare everyone that can't make out a difference between 1080p and 4k source material to use a Monitor 40" or bigger. On my LG CX (48") that I use as a monitor the difference is night and day.
It should be noted, though, that the difference is rather minor when video footage has been shot by phones - their sensors are just too small to make out the minute differences, plus they can't take in enough light. If you compare professional video material shot by expensive dedicated gear in 1080p vs 2160p, the difference is HUGE, whilst smartphone camera footage isn't that "obvious".
At the end of the day it's what works for a given person. If 1080p video works then that's a great option, if 4k works then that's a great option.
If the 4k video is really only twice the size then it's because they're being more aggressive in compression. There's no magic bullet to squeeze 4x the data into 2x the space other than throwing data out.
Tangentially related - GoPro's 8/9 and probably 10 set (i.e. limit) the recorded video to 100mbs for higher resolutions. Ergo you get higher quality (less compression) with 4k24 versus 4k30 versus 4k60 because they're all recorded at the same bit rate.
The P6P may have throughput issues that limits just how fast they can write data that results in higher compression in order to reduce the file size at higher resolutions. Or it could be design choice to reduce file use since the most common ones are likely the 128gb versions.
In this case, specifically with the P6P's, the actual end result is that 1080P might be nearly as good as 4K if they're cranking the compression up and loosing the details that are the point of recording in 4k. So bottom line the OP could have a pretty solid case.
I should get mine tomorrow and the holiday coming up should make for some interesting testing.
Ultimoose said:
At the end of the day it's what works for a given person. If 1080p video works then that's a great option, if 4k works then that's a great option.
If the 4k video is really only twice the size then it's because they're being more aggressive in compression. There's no magic bullet to squeeze 4x the data into 2x the space other than throwing data out.
Tangentially related - GoPro's 8/9 and probably 10 set (i.e. limit) the recorded video to 100mbs for higher resolutions. Ergo you get higher quality (less compression) with 4k24 versus 4k30 versus 4k60 because they're all recorded at the same bit rate.
The P6P may have throughput issues that limits just how fast they can write data that results in higher compression in order to reduce the file size at higher resolutions. Or it could be design choice to reduce file use since the most common ones are likely the 128gb versions.
In this case, specifically with the P6P's, the actual end result is that 1080P might be nearly as good as 4K if they're cranking the compression up and loosing the details that are the point of recording in 4k. So bottom line the OP could have a pretty solid case.
I should get mine tomorrow and the holiday coming up should make for some interesting testing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1080p30 is 19.8mb/s at 1080p
4k30 is 42.8mbps
1080p60 is 24mb/s
4k60 is 62mb/s
this was at h265
4k30 h264 is only 48mb/s
4k60 h264 is only 72mb/s
h265 uses a main profile @ 6.1
h264 used a high profile
4k60h265 is only 45.2mbs on my galaxy note 9
For me, the question is do you need 60 FPS over 30 FPS? I do 4K because I want the highest resolution I can get but I do 30 FPS because I don't need that smooth look.
Izy said:
1080p30 is 19.8mb/s at 1080p
4k30 is 42.8mbps
1080p60 is 24mb/s
4k60 is 62mb/s
this was at h265
4k30 h264 is only 48mb/s
4k60 h264 is only 72mb/s
h265 uses a main profile @ 6.1
h264 used a high profile
4k60h265 is only 45.2mbs on my galaxy note 9
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's interesting that the bitrates are on the lower, half the bitrate for 4K30 for example compared to any GP in the last few years. Is this user adjustable is a question.
I'm getting the P6P 512 with the hope that I can ditch the GP's I usually carry. I record VLOG footage during my ultra runs and I carry a phone with me regardless. One less device and its accessories to deal with would be great.
I have a selection of video recorded with my GP 8 and 9's, I can run the same run/route in the same resolution and do an apples to apples comparison of quality. It'll be interesting if nothing else to compare the stabilization quality of each. Hmm, I think I can probably mount both the phone and a GP to the same stick and get direct side by side as well. The wheels are spinning now on how best to compare the final product of each for my needs.
Ultimoose said:
That's interesting that the bitrates are on the lower, half the bitrate for 4K30 for example compared to any GP in the last few years. Is this user adjustable is a question.
I'm getting the P6P 512 with the hope that I can ditch the GP's I usually carry. I record VLOG footage during my ultra runs and I carry a phone with me regardless. One less device and its accessories to deal with would be great.
I have a selection of video recorded with my GP 8 and 9's, I can run the same run/route in the same resolution and do an apples to apples comparison of quality. It'll be interesting if nothing else to compare the stabilization quality of each. Hmm, I think I can probably mount both the phone and a GP to the same stick and get direct side by side as well. The wheels are spinning now on how best to compare the final product of each for my needs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
could be a heavier encoding profile than standard go pros that and action cams in general usually have a large amount of motion so bitrate is needed to compensate and gopros are generally used professionally so editing etc needs that kind of headroom
my akaso v50x uses the same bitrate roughly at 4k30 as the pixel but is perfectly fine in daytime except its cheapness shows in low light performance

Categories

Resources