MFC HD video test seen

[Zoomer]

I think some of you girls are giving non-HD streams a little too much credit for your sexiness.

Guys are not going to go "oh WOW so this is what you really look like! :? "

Agree, and last night I stopped by crazysysy to see what HD is for her, and saw no difference in her cam quality at all. So question is can you get the HD tag without having the HD cam? (I don't know if she has one). I guess if we resize the screen we'll see significant differences, but with the "standard" size of video feed, it is clearer but nothing that has made me think "omfg how did I ever visit this site?".

 

[FifthElephant]

[quote="Zoomer"So question is can you get the HD tag without having the HD cam?[/quote]

Normally, the video is encoded with the old 'flv' codec.
With 'HD' it's encoded with the much newer h.264 standard.
For at least some models yesterday, it was doing h.264 in 320*240 - this is considerably clearer, unless the models bandwidth is very high, due to the better compression.

 

[Zoomer]

Since it is just the codec used and if no checks upon whether the resolution available to the cam is "HD" quality, it would mean it is possible for a model to therefore have HD showing without actually having a HD cam. In other words, same resolution as before.

 

[Jeromerow]

I'd say the most common error after framerate is white burn or too much contrast. We need some professionals to explain the difference in lighting in both modes. I guess less direct light and more ambiance.

 

[bawksy]

I have a feeling I'm going to be making a lot more of these posts now:

http://www.ambercutie.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=95158#p95158

 

[cheeks]

I hate the cam preview for HD cam's is not working.

and how is this HD

 

[FifthElephant]

I have a feeling I'm going to be making a lot more of these posts now:

http://www.ambercutie.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=95158#p95158

You're clearly slacking. I don't see one post on that thread with HD yet.

To be fair though, at the moment, the only lower camscore (under 1k) models I saw with HD on have decent camera setups, as do the handful of the upper end that I sampled.
No asians at all who I looked at (who, if they could get it working at 320*240 would _greatly_ benefit with their terrible connections) seemed to have it enabled.
I guess it's simply as the self-selected models are the ones that actually care.

 

[Zoomer]

If they've got a terrible connection, how can HD possibly help? A bad connection with packet loss and low upload bandwidth is a bad connection with packet loss and low upload bandwidth... if you utilise something which requires more upload bandwidth I am at a loss how it is supposed to help them out?

 

[nzhere]

If they've got a terrible connection, how can HD possibly help? A bad connection with packet loss and low upload bandwidth is a bad connection with packet loss and low upload bandwidth... if you utilise something which requires more upload bandwidth I am at a loss how it is supposed to help them out?

If models can change their existing video encoding over to H264 and be allowed to stay @ the previous 320x240 resolution it will be far more efficient and should provide better video performance whatever the connection.

Perhaps a software option could be added "use H264" and a resolution box beside with "HD yes/no"

 

[Zoomer]

Ah, now am with you Back to the broadcasting of regular (standard) content using the HD codec instead of whatever was used before. Any idea how much better the compression is with H.264?

 

[nzhere]

I've asked someone at MFC and was told 500kb in the video quality profile is the recommended minimum for models doing HD.

I did see an Asian model on earlier and she was only getting 369kb at 9fps

Perhaps some models would like to share their figures?

wait that didn't come out right

 

[Jessi J]

Josclyn's went to pure shit.


Also, my video doesn't LOOK as superior as some of the other girls, I am using an HD camera, have an exremely fast internet connection. I saw HaileyJade, her cam looked fantastic! Mine looks nothing like that, but with the HD its a SIGNIFICANT improvement from what it was!

 

[Jessi J]

I've asked someone at MFC and was told 500kb in the video quality profile is the recommended minimum for models doing HD.

I did see an Asian model on earlier and she was only getting 369kb at 9fps

Perhaps some models would like to share their figures?

wait that didn't come out right

After opening and closing multiple times, I was able to get 1000 kb and 10fps. For the most part I seem to be running anywhere between like 500 - 700kbps.

 

[mankor]

Josclyn's went to pure shit.


Also, my video doesn't LOOK as superior as some of the other girls, I am using an HD camera, have an exremely fast internet connection. I saw HaileyJade, her cam looked fantastic! Mine looks nothing like that, but with the HD its a SIGNIFICANT improvement from what it was!

Some high-end consumer HD cams have on-board codec compression optimised for streaming in SD or HD, this takes the demand away from the computer and may result in smoother frame rates and colour representation. These higher quality cams probably also have better automatic contrast, colour, and light reaction times (e.g. fewer or no white-outs on highlights from harsh lighting). Of course, nothing beats good ambient lighting - having a good daylight bulb helps (strip-bulbs are usually classed as this, these can be bought as a convenient angle-poise lamp) and is going to be far better than a single low-wattage energy saving bulb in the ceiling.

To my mind the Logitechs are among the best webcams at the moment, models like the C510 and C910, they have high quality lenses and good software controls (better on PC than Mac at the moment, but they are supposedly UVC so should all work without any drivers). See http://www.logitech.com/en-gb/488/4770?debug=0 for Logitech's explanation of UVC.

 

[Jessi J]

My cam is already doing the best it can. I have the logitech c910.

Also, no one realizes how MUCH manycams is degrading their video quality. Ginny is on in HD and if anything it might look a bit worse because she is still running that damn manycams! (I take that back it is mediocre - no real change)
Force size doesn't seem to help at all with this either.

 

[tightlockup]

In the model cam software can you set a max fps? That might come in handy. I think 12 fps is fine.

 

[Mikeythegeek]

I'm actually surprised at how little the HD mode is helping some cam feeds. I was just looking at GinnyPotter and thinking how it looked the same or worse than before. Conversely, ChristineAsh's feed was pretty good before but the HD mode has made her feed look great with how sharp the image is. Then I look over at SexyKimberly who I've thought had a pretty decent feed and the HD mode hasn't improved it or degraded it any, IMO. Lastly, I looked at a new model with a score just under 1k and her feed is about the same as Ginny's, maybe a touch worse.

I'm not smart enough to guess why 3 different models with high to fairly high scores are having different results with the HD feeds. I just thought it was worth noting. The only thing I can figure is that in many cases, the HD is going to magnify the feed quality, both positively and negatively.

 

[AerynShade]

I'm actually surprised at how little the HD mode is helping some cam feeds. I was just looking at GinnyPotter and thinking how it looked the same or worse than before. Conversely, ChristineAsh's feed was pretty good before but the HD mode has made her feed look great with how sharp the image is. Then I look over at SexyKimberly who I've thought had a pretty decent feed and the HD mode hasn't improved it or degraded it any, IMO. Lastly, I looked at a new model with a score just under 1k and her feed is about the same as Ginny's, maybe a touch worse.

I'm not smart enough to guess why 3 different models with high to fairly high scores are having different results with the HD feeds. I just thought it was worth noting. The only thing I can figure is that in many cases, the HD is going to magnify the feed quality, both positively and negatively.

Of the ladies you mentioned, which ones if any, have banners (using manycam)?

 

[Mikeythegeek]

I'm actually surprised at how little the HD mode is helping some cam feeds. I was just looking at GinnyPotter and thinking how it looked the same or worse than before. Conversely, ChristineAsh's feed was pretty good before but the HD mode has made her feed look great with how sharp the image is. Then I look over at SexyKimberly who I've thought had a pretty decent feed and the HD mode hasn't improved it or degraded it any, IMO. Lastly, I looked at a new model with a score just under 1k and her feed is about the same as Ginny's, maybe a touch worse.

I'm not smart enough to guess why 3 different models with high to fairly high scores are having different results with the HD feeds. I just thought it was worth noting. The only thing I can figure is that in many cases, the HD is going to magnify the feed quality, both positively and negatively.

Of the ladies you mentioned, which ones if any, have banners (using manycam)?

None of them. There was no banners on any of those feeds.

 

[Traditio]

Best cam i have seen so far with the new HD was Emprus - but she also had great lightning and cam before...

 

[SoTxBob]

I've also noticed mixed results with the HD. Mentioning CrazySysy.. I know Mary has a good cam [910] and sufficient bandwidth to handle the HD. The single hairs aren't as blurred but theres not much real difference after that.

Also, on the tech side.. since manycam was mentioned, are there any preferred cam spliters like that [ manycam, splitcam, etc.] for HD ? I know several girls that run splitcam and say they cant get MFC software to recognize the cams without it or a similar program. :?

 

[AmberCutie]

I've also noticed mixed results with the HD. Mentioning CrazySysy.. I know Mary has a good cam [910] and sufficient bandwidth to handle the HD. The single hairs aren't as blurred but theres not much real difference after that.

Also, on the tech side.. since manycam was mentioned, are there any preferred cam spliters like that [ manycam, splitcam, etc.] for HD ? I know several girls that run splitcam and say they cant get MFC software to recognize the cams without it or a similar program. :?

I use webcammax (free for trial version, but forces you to have an ugly banner, $20 for regular version) to run my cam and didn't have any issue with it when I tested the HD stream on Friday.

 

[JickyJuly]

I stopped being a wet noodle and tried the hd today. It looked nice on my end, but even though my speed never went less than excellent my fps stayed at 10. The internet we have is really good and my cam is a 9000. Shouldn't my fps be better than that? I asked if it was choppy but no one really answered. It was a mass of "boobies!!" and one lone creative genius who wanted to "jizz in my eyes". Daycrowd with no regulars present is a madhouse. Hehe. :lol:

 

[JickyJuly]

Now I can't get the HD to work again. I even uninstalled and reinstalled everything. Is anyone else experiencing this? I feel like I finally accepted HD only to have it reject me.

 

[Mikeythegeek]

Now I can't get the HD to work again. I even uninstalled and reinstalled everything. Is anyone else experiencing this? I feel like I finally accepted HD only to have it reject me.

From MFC's Twitter at 2:39 PM PDT today- HD is offline while we make improvements to it. Thanks so much for your comments and suggestions.

 

[Jupiter551]

I asked if it was choppy but no one really answered. It was a mass of "boobies!!" and one lone creative genius who wanted to "jizz in my eyes".

So it sounds like they enjoyed the HD :toothy9:

 

[nzhere]

I stopped being a wet noodle and tried the hd today. It looked nice on my end, but even though my speed never went less than excellent my fps stayed at 10. The internet we have is really good and my cam is a 9000. Shouldn't my fps be better than that? I asked if it was choppy but no one really answered. It was a mass of "boobies!!" and one lone creative genius who wanted to "jizz in my eyes". Daycrowd with no regulars present is a madhouse. Hehe. :lol:

It stays at 10 fps as its fixed at 10 fps max in the encoding process. I'm wondering if they will allow it to scale up. If at the 500kbps minimum 10 fps, 600 would mean 12 fps, 750 for 15fps.

I saw 2 on the asian page testing hd last night

details were

Model 1 369 kbps fps 9 (C910) (looked bad , clear on still shots and chunky over compressed on motion.

Model 2 438 kbps fps 10 (Logitech 9000) (looked ok , could count all her pimples but a few freezes with the frame rate)

 

[Jupiter551]

It stays at 10 fps as its fixed at 10 fps max in the encoding process. I'm wondering if they will allow it to scale up. If at the 500kbps minimum 10 fps, 600 would mean 12 fps, 750 for 15fps.

I saw 2 on the asian page testing hd last night

details were

Model 1 369 kbps fps 9 (C910) (looked bad , clear on still shots and chunky over compressed on motion.

Model 2 438 kbps fps 10 (Logitech 9000) (looked ok , could count all her pimples but a few freezes with the frame rate)

10 fps should be fine though - 10 frames per second. Unless she's a constant and energetic ball of motion you won't even notice the fps; this ain't crysis

 

[FifthElephant]

10 fps should be fine though - 10 frames per second. Unless she's a constant and energetic ball of motion you won't even notice the fps; this ain't crysis

There is a reason why film chose 24fps.
At that time it was expensive and hard to do high FPS.
They could not go any lower, and maintain smooth motion.

Has anyone noticed today that normal cams for most girls are looking a lot 'better' - but lower framerate?
It's as if they've been tweaking stuff, and lowered the compression and framerate, leading to better qulity fewer frames.

Sure - 10fps is just fine.
As long as the model sits there. And doesn't talk.

 

[Jupiter551]

There is a reason why film chose 24fps.
At that time it was expensive and hard to do high FPS.
They could not go any lower, and maintain smooth motion.

Has anyone noticed today that normal cams for most girls are looking a lot 'better' - but lower framerate?
It's as if they've been tweaking stuff, and lowered the compression and framerate, leading to better qulity fewer frames.

Sure - 10fps is just fine.
As long as the model sits there. And doesn't talk.

Well I'm not contradicting you because I really don't know, but thinking of video as a collection of still pictures in sequence to give the illusion of motion - wouldn't most animation be less than 10 frames per second?