this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
1533 points (99.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

6035 readers
2290 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

If you watched it in 320p like the old days then it might be faster?

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

But 360p today looks far worse than 360p back then. Not only have bitrate etc. been reduced, older videos have also been re-encoded multiple times.

[–] Cenzorrll@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It's pretty wild. I have recently been ripping my DVD/Blu-ray collection and encoding them from a clean rip to my server. Encoding at 480p is perfectly acceptable if you're starting with a high enough bitrate source. You can tell it's 480p, but its so much better than Netflix's absolute trash streams that will give you "UHD" at bitrates lower than a DVD. 360p does leave something to be desired, but they're still perfectly watchable.

There are certainly shows and movies that deserve higher definition, but I've found that unless they're from the ground up meant to be purely visually masterpieces, it's better to have lower resolution and a matching bitrate than to ruin the experience with artifacts.