Why u so not look good on MFC?

[GingerOwnsChris]

Is it just me, or do other people agree that the video quality on MFC, even in HD rooms, is inferior to the quality on Streamate?
Whenever I poke around Streamate, the picture is crisp, responsive - it looks very... touchable.
On MFC, the lines are softer, the motion is kinda sluggish, and the colors are... flat?
I thought it could be a bandwidth issue, but no, I just checked. One of the popular HD rooms on MFC (soft, sluggish picture) I gave me a steady 130 kB/s. However, a random room on Streamate (crisp, quick picture) had the bandwidth fluctuating between 30 and 80 kB/s. So, less traffic, better picture on Streamate.

Why so unfair?

I love MFC, I don't want to go over to the dark side! :crybaby:

 

[ElaySmith]

SM has much higher streaming standards that MFC does for its models, we also stream through an encoder with special settings etc. There have been several models that have had issues camming on SM because of the internet connection required to get good placement there. If you are looking at the first page of SM I would say you have a better chance of seeing better quality cams just because internet connection and the type of computer the models use (plus a few other factors) give you your placement on SM. If you go back a few pages you will probably find cam quality more along the lines of what you see on MFC.

 

[Crumb]

it's not just you, I've noticed it too

and it makes me a bit sad but I really like MFC, but like SM feeds better because the video is a lot crisper

watching Kitty Wilde on SM and then seeing her on MFC... world of difference

 

[Deleted member 8603]

The HD system on MFC doesn't work (when I was there and tried, at least) and the normal feed system on a site will always be wonky looking.

On Streamate, many girls use adobe media live flash encoder http://www.adobe.com/products/flash-media-encoder.html
It makes Hd show up clearer and can be set for the girl's uses.

The first page and even farther will be full of girls with good connections and good processors who are running the encoder.
So its something that's really worked for on Streamate, more so than any other site I've used.

It's one of the good things about a site with a lower payout percentage and a good example of it being used for the right things.
The site is actually able to pay to make things better because of the % and can handle the quality streams.

And like Elay said, a few pages back you will find girls whose cam quality decreases to about the same as any other site, either because they can't get good internet, a good computer, or have problems figuring out or running the encoder.

 

[GingerOwnsChris]

Interesting! Sounds like Streamate was smarter about their setup: the Adobe Flash Encoder must be doing some of the video processing on the client side, so their servers have to do less work. It sounds like something that MFC software engineers could do as well, and it will not even require them to modify their server-side setup...

And considering that the same model on the same computer and network connection has different video quality on MFC and Streamate, it is not only about the standards that these web sites impose on the models.

 

[Evvie]

Interesting! Sounds like Streamate was smarter about their setup: the Adobe Flash Encoder must be doing some of the video processing on the client side, so their servers have to do less work. It sounds like something that MFC software engineers could do as well, and it will not even require them to modify their server-side setup...

And considering that the same model on the same computer and network connection has different video quality on MFC and Streamate, it is not only about the standards that these web sites impose on the models.

I was under the impression that higher quality broadcasts cost more money (more information being sent), and because MFC doesn't reward models based on broadcast quality, they would not necessarily bring in more money to compensate for higher costs.

 

[GingerOwnsChris]

Yes, but as I said, the bandwidth that I was getting from MFC was actually 2x greater than the bandwidth from Streamate, and the Streamate picture was better. Besides bandwidth, the costs of high-quality broadcasts may be in the computing power required to perform encoding to the right format and to perform lossy compression, but Streamate probably made a smart move of shoving that task off to the models' computers.

 

[Shaun__]

I have seen a model on both Chaturbate and MFC. She has a better video quality on Chaturbate for some reason. I know MFC is making massive amounts of money, but if they do not consider investing in their infrastructure they may lose their lofty place in the web cam world to a rival one day.

 

[NoelleBright]

I have seen a model on both Chaturbate and MFC. She has a better video quality on Chaturbate for some reason. I know MFC is making massive amounts of money, but if they do not consider investing in their infrastructure they may lose their lofty place in the web cam world to a rival one day.

I have an account there that I cam on from time to time and I have noticed that my video looks way better there as well. When they first started the quality was abysmal but they have really stepped it up.

 

[stu2]