Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

60_fps [2017/09/18 00:06]
beandog created
60_fps [2017/09/18 00:22] (current)
beandog
Line 23: Line 23:
  
 A third reason is that the encodes are somehow smaller with 60 fps. I have no idea why, as I don't completely understand the encoding process, but I'll happily take the 5% decrease as a bonus since I don't have *that* much storage still. A third reason is that the encodes are somehow smaller with 60 fps. I have no idea why, as I don't completely understand the encoding process, but I'll happily take the 5% decrease as a bonus since I don't have *that* much storage still.
 +
 +The fourth reason is that it just gives me warm fuzzies. It's nice to know that I've got things so squared away
 +
 +The final reason is the argument in general that the TV is playing back at 60hz anyway, and that the video will be smoother at 60 fps for that reason.
 +
 +Now for the cons, of which there are good ones as well.
 +
 +For someone who is a purist and determined to get the best quality as possible with no modification to the material that is not necessary, changing the framerate flies completely in the face of that goal. Converting video to another framerate is obvious modification.
 +
 +Next is doing basic QA. If there'​s a problem with the encoded video, how do you know that converting the framerate isn't the cause of the problems? If there was A/V sync issues, the FPS is probably the first culprit in every case that's going to be called into question.
 +
 +Warm fuzzies are just that -- emotional reasoning that ignores logic in favor of believing something is better, just because **it is!** That's some serious hand-waving there, and I'm being harsh on purpose ... and to its favor, placebos actually do work. It logically doesn'​t make sense, though, as its own reason.
 +
 +Most of it is going to be creating duplicate frames anyway. You'd get just as much "​quality"​ improvement when it comes to wanting to standardize on a fixed framerate. However, I think if you're going to standardize,​ there'​d be more problems creating duplicate frames every 4 to 2 frames in general, so going to 60 makes sense here -- you might as well give it much more room.
 +
 +So, there'​s some good reasons to go ahead and encode it in 60 fps, but probably the best of all is a good generic "it won't hurt" summary argument. Don't do it with the expectation to improve quality of the source, but because it can improve playback of the video .. possibly. That's good enough. :)

Navigation