REC
Active topics
  1. Well, to me it sounds that you just make something appear bigger (size) without any real improvement of quality. Unless you mean that you can kind of "undo" the youtube-compression that way. But this sound impossible to me.

    For example let's say you edit a multicam out of SD footage but when you are done you encode it in 1920x1080. This will blow up the size but will not effect the actual quality. I know that vetri also has HD sources and there's nothing wrong using the poorer (in terms of image quality) pro-shot images for some parts.
  2. Its not about undoing anything, its about restricting further loss.

    If you reencode a 128kbps mp3 to 128kbps it will sound worse, reencode it to 320 it will STILL sound worse. But BETTER than the first case.

    In an pseudo-ideal situation you would reencode the 128 kbps to FLAC, which will be equal in quality. But doing that with video will end up gigabytes and more in size.

    Anyway its more a theoretical issue since there is not that much difference since YouTube will turn all video into crap. For me 1080p is not really HD if the bitrate is too low. We dont encode 5.1 surround in 64 kbps mp3 either.
  3. I understand, you mean I write "Multicam HD" without that 100% of the images are in HD. I could very well do with images only in HD, but, between us, it would suck. For example, when I edit, I'm looking for all the HD videos I can find in a specific city. But unfortunately, many people do not always recorded, and when they do, it is rarely in HD. It's happened cases I go to edit certain song in a certain city and only found 3 cameras in HD. Well, I could do a multicam with just these 3 cameras, but I think it would look very amateur. Some videos in 480p are great, in my simple opinion. Of course I'm no professional, never done any course related to that., I do it as a hobby.
  4. Yeah, and its awesome I think most people prefer a good 480p above a crappy 1080p. I mean, pick a retail NTSC dvd from your collection. Its not that bad
  5. Not to mention that sometimes I need a camera that is focused on a particular member of the band,but i find only one single camera and this one is in 480p. So I can not rule it out.
  6. I see where you are coming from and it's ok as you are the creator. I do multicams myself but my credo is "only HD".

    I am actually pretty optimistic for the next tour. HD conquers gadgets more and more. The problem is just that HD isn't really HD sometimes, so to speak. HD coming from a camcorder or good pocket cam like the Sony Cybershort series is superior to HD videos recorded with an iphone. But it's still better than SD quality.
  8. U2 - Vertigo (360º Live from Perth, Western Australia, Australia) [From the Ground Up's Audio]
  10. It's refreshing to see some pre-2009 footage every now and then We've been seriously spoiled by soooo much video material this past tour that seeing older videos makes for a nice experience haha
  12. Originally posted by LikeASong:It's refreshing to see some pre-2009 footage every now and then We've been seriously spoiled by soooo much video material this past tour that seeing older videos makes for a nice experience haha

    Yes, but because it is far easier to make videos of 360, since before that the lack of cameras was increasing.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.