When I was briefly in college for computer science, javascript was the first programming class on the list. It was required as part of the degree. Luckily, I left before I learned anything.
No. By an extremely rough calculation, the N64 has 14 buttons, so on every frame there are 2^14 = 16,384 possible button press combinations. Super Mario 64 runs at 30 frames per second iirc, so in one second there are 16384^30 possible movie files, which is a number over 100 digits long. Even if we got a supercomputer that could process a quadrillion movie files per second, it would still take several googol years to try them all. And that's just 1 second. Brute forcing just isn't possible.
Super Mario 64 uses 9 buttons. The problem is the 65536 positions of the analog stick. (Minus deadzone and possible lower resolution used)
Imo other games look better with 60fps deblink as well, like SM. While arm pumping does look worse, replacing fake transparency with actual transparency when Samus is taking damage or on the elevator looks much better.
This is where I disagree. I like the fast blinking better than the replacement of actual transparency. Also the as feos said, there may be artifacts from deblinking. I think in the end it's a preference like having hqx filter. The fact it may have artifacts though is what concerns me.
If you don't think there are artifacts in the deblinked 60fps footage, try 0.25 speed. Climbing the platforms(Metroid) shows this best.
In native 60fps the video with no deblinking is clearly best. I think a better question is: Which one do you prefer if you are limited to watching in 30fps?
I turned html5 off to test this in IE11.
Full FPS encode:
I still see blinking when Samus takes damage and when arm pumping. There are times when Samus is invisible for a few frames in a row, and times when she is solid. The elevator looks the worst. It is not consistent. So however youtube cuts 60fps down to 30fps, it is not exactly every other frame of the source.
Deblinked encode:
It is much more clear exactly where Samus is all the time. There are artifacts around the sprite. Samus is blurry when running at full speed. Riding the elevator looks much better.
Do I think the deblinked version looks better at 30fps? Yes.
Do I think the deblinked version looks better at 60fps? No.
I understand the deblinking is a backwards compatibility compromise. It makes encodes look better for 30fps viewers(probably the majority) and worse for 60fps viewers.
If this is what it takes to start making more 60fps encodes, I am all for it.
Alrighty then, works in the older version but not the newer version.
I can't get a 60fps option in IE regardless of whether or not I'm in HTML5 mode. I want to say it's because of OS differences but I can't be sure without either someone with Win8.1 and the most recent IE saying if they can get 60 fps or not or exileut upgrading and reporting if it breaks or not. And I don't want to ask exileut to upgrade IE versions because (1) it may break and (2) apparently they're actively avoiding upgrading IE for reasons.
On Mac OS X, with Firefox Samus blinks both on 360p and 720p. I don't understand why it works differently in Windows.
With Chrome the sprite blinks in 360p in the same way, and in 720p60 it blinks significantly faster, and all movement is visibly smoother (which isn't surprising; in other words, the 60Hz version is working as it should).
This sounds about right; the current position is that YouTube only supports 60fps in Chrome. That someone reported it working in IE is unusual given the fact that Google and Microsoft are supposed to be competitors on that front and 60fps YouTube is a fairly recent thing. I'll test my desktop in Debian Jessie here momentarily as well as the alternate machine I've got here.
Summary: Internet Explorer 11 had flawless performance. Easily outperformed Chrome. I recommend it for all of your 60fps youtube watching :)
So IE can play 60fps YT videos?
exileut wrote:
IE 11.0.9600.17239 Super Metroid Full FPS: I needed to go to https://www.youtube.com/html5 to enable 60fps watching. I could still watch in HD, but I was limited to 30fps.
Summary: Internet Explorer 11 had flawless performance. Easily outperformed Chrome. I recommend it for all of your 60fps youtube watching :)
"As for posting, please describe what difference do you see between full fps encodes and deblinked ones."
All programs closed. No other moving images. Windows 8.1 x64. Chrome 39.0.2171.95 m. IE 11.0.9600.17239. MPC-HC x64 1.7.7. VLC 2.1.5.
Source (60 fps lossless emulator dump):
Samus' sprite alternates between transparent and solid while taking damage. Door transitions rarely have hitches. Very rarely in VLC. MPC-HC performed worse.
Super Metroid Full FPS (Chrome):
Samus' sprite alternates between transparent and solid while taking damage. Door transitions sometimes have 1-4 hitches. It is different each time. This can happen at 720p or 1080p, theater mode or fullscreen.
Super Metroid Full FPS (IE11):
Default IE in Windows 8.1 can play 60fps youtube. Visit https://www.youtube.com/html5 . I didn't have a single frame drop during door transitions. Resolution or window size did not matter.
Super Metroid deblinked: Samus' sprite stays translucent while taking damage. Door transitions are consistently rough.
Well, obviously you're not going to notice that much if you sit on a tiny screen, but screens with 1920x1080 is pretty high these days and on such screens, it looks absolutely awful. I always compare full screen, of course. Can't watch videos non-full screen.
...Well, unless your computer can't handle it. That sucks :(
Youtube point resize to 1440p looks much better than the MKV encode to me. 360p Youtube vs. 360p MKV: Youtube looks worse. Multiple Youtube transcodes of the same source = worse quality.
I already compared this: http://imgur.com/a/U3NHl Download full size images. The top image is 1440p point resize on Youtube. Others are various Youtube resizes. Original encode looks most similar to 240p Youtube.
Youtube transcodes your uploads. The original file is gone. Saving every 1GB-100GB source does not seem economically feasible.
Sure. I figure as much, but as some have said, apparently some have been able to retroactively make 30 fps sources into 60 fps sources. I can't reproduce that behavior. Uploading new files in 60 fps works, though.
I've seen a 60fps video uploaded in May, so it at least applies retroactively in some cases. It should apply to the rest once Youtube works out all the kinks.
So around 2016, maybe.
Do you have a link to the video from May? They released a Playlist in June:
"We're starting to roll out video support for 48 and even 60 frames per second. See how high frame rates can make motion-intense videos like these ones even more awesome. Make sure you watch in 720 resolution or higher!"
Someone had also said(on reddit gopro post) that if you uploaded 60fps in the past you can go in "edit enhancement" and youtube will go in and switch it to 60fps instead you having to reupload again.
Does not work for me.
Youtube transcodes your uploads. The original file is gone. Saving every 1GB-100GB source does not seem economically feasible.
FWIW, I'm pretty sure we won't officially start relying on that feature yet, since its so weirdly implemented and still looks unfinished. Some modes don't work, some browsers don't work, etc.
79.74% of Windows users use IE and Chrome combined. (required for 1080p60)Source
1.14% of Windows users own a 1440p or 4k monitor. (required for 1440p30/2160p30)Source
1% of people can display 1440p+. Why encode at 1440p+ at all?
80% of people can display 1080p60. Why not create an additional encode?
I have only tested 4 browsers so far: http://imgur.com/a/PjkEs
It appears Chrome 38 and Internet Explorer 11 support 60 FPS in HTML5 mode.
Firefox and Opera do not support 60 FPS with the HTML5 player. And of course the flash player is limited to 30 FPS on all browsers.
Tested on Windows 8.1 64bit
Edit: Added Safari for Windows test!
Edit2: 2560x1440 60 FPS is not supported. There is also no option for 2560x1440 30FPS since 60FPS overwrites all 30FPS versions of a video.
[/URL]
Now idea how to embed or crop.