Support NeoGAF

[SimleuqiR]

http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/09/youtube-partner-program-4k/

YouTube is adding support for video shot in the 4K video format — a very high resolution that clocks in at 4096 x 3072, or 4096p). And it’s also creating a new $5 million Partner Grants program that’s meant to help spur the creation of original content on YouTube by funding promising video ventures.

In a blog post, YouTube writes that the goal of the Grants program “is to act as a catalyst by infusing additional funds into the production budgets of a small group of YouTube partners who are at the forefront of innovation” and says that these funds will be serving as “an advance against the partner’s future revenue share”.

Here how the program works:

* YouTube is identifying eligible partners based on factors such as video views, subscribers, growth rate, audience engagement and production expertise
* Selected partners are contacted by YouTube and invited to submit a Grant proposal
* Proposals are evaluated by YouTube based on signals which include projected performance, distribution plan, marketing plan, cost requirements and appeal to advertisers
* If approved, funds are transferred to the partner so they can get started on their project

The future is now!!

I can't wait for my 4096p TV, making my Wii HD look like is connected through RCA. :lol

YouTube says that the ideal screen size for 4K video is 25 feet.

 

[derder]

isn't that 3072p?

 

[MrHicks]

this will never work in many countries due to monthly bandwith caps
how fucking HUGE would the average 10 min video be at that resolution?

several GB's?
fuck that

 

[Rapstah]

this will never work in many countries due to monthly bandwith caps
how fucking HUGE would the average 10 min video be at that resolution?

several GB's?
fuck that

I must be doing something wrong then, my five-minute 400*240 videos clock in at two GBs...

 

[SimleuqiR]

this will never work in many countries due to monthly bandwith caps
how fucking HUGE would the average 10 min video be at that resolution?

several GB's?
fuck that

His next movie shot at 4K resolution...believe.

 

[badcrumble]

What the fuck? I mean, great that they're doing it because it's cool, but it's not like anybody will be able to use this kind of tech until quite a while from now.

 

[falconzss]

I must be doing something wrong then, my five-minute 400*240 videos clock in at two GBs...

yay for uncompressed video.

 

[Hellsing321]

isn't that 3072p?

It is? Fuck this shit then! I want the rest of my goddamn p's!

 

[XiaNaphryz]

4k renders are awesome on the big screen.

 

[androvsky]

His next movie shot at 4K resolution...believe.

Avatar was shot at 2K?

Good 4K content is so stinkin' hard to find, believe me.

 

[bistromathics]

I must be doing something wrong then, my five-minute 400*240 videos clock in at two GBs...

you are doin something wrong

 

[Government-man]

So 4K would not be widescreen then? Ye olde 4:3

Edit: And I though Ultra-HD (or Super Hi-Vision)was the next step (7,680 × 4,320 (16:9))?

 

[Dreams-Visions]

3K and 4K are what excite me most in the future of "HD".

people that are impressed by those "retina" displays on their iPhones know that these resolutions are damn near retina displays for big ass televisions.

WANT.

will upgrade when this technology becomes available on TV at a reasonable price. not before (fuck 3D).

 

[XiaNaphryz]

So 4K would not be widescreen then? Ye olde 4:3

It's a format best suited for something like IMAX, which isn't a widescreen aspect ratio.

 

[Visualante]

Avatar was shot at 2K?

Good 4K content is so stinkin' hard to find, believe me.

Because it's a pain to throw around a network. The new live action Pixar film has a huge opening shot and they don't even know how to pipeline that for IMAX.

 

[gcubed]

avatar was 2k, there was just an article on engadget about them seeing Toy Story 3 in 4k 3D

 

[Kaako]

Hell yes.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

Also don't forget that for many movies, what's actually shot is much bigger than what ends up being displayed on the screen in the end. So it would eventually get cropped to the proper aspect ratio, but still retain the resolution.

 

[Mudkips]

Preview pic here:
You'll have to click it because it's so huge!

http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/2784/douche.jpg

 

[wolfmat]

I don't really give a shit. But good for everyone who does!

 

[jett]

:lol What for when their 720p and 1080p video quality is total trash? How about you work on your codecs first, youtube.

 

[Dennis]

Preview pic here:
You'll have to click it because it's so huge!

http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/2784/douche.jpg

What is the purpose of that pic :lol

It just a low res pic resized to 4k.

Joke?

 

[Dennis]

:lol What for when their 720p and 1080p video quality is total trash? How about you work on your codecs first, youtube.

This.

1080p YouTube is slow as all fuck. 4k? Yeah, I got all day....

Though, I have some 1080p footage I could upscale to 4k to see if the loss in picture quality is very significant.

If not, then it would be easy and routine for me (and others) to convert to 4k footage.

I capture at 2560x1600 and 60 frames per second off my computer already.

 

[ClosingADoor]

What's the use of this. Like you can see the difference between 1080p and this when it is compressed for internet usage. Sounds nice on paper, but adds nothing.

 

[jett]

His next movie shot at 4K resolution...believe.

James Cameron doesn't care about 4K. His next movie will be shot at 48fps, believe THAT.

 

[Mudkips]

What is the purpose of that pic :lol

It just a low res pic resized to 4k.

Joke?

The joke is that he's some annoying douche who is ALWAYS on the front page of youtube, and youtube "HD" quality is a blurry mess because they simply don't have the bandwidth to do decent encodes at high resolution.

 

[Medalion]

WTF is the point of that insane resolution on youtube when they can't even get 1080p right? Lot of their video is highly compressed full of artifacts and shit...

 

[JBuccCP]

We're gonna need more makeup.

 

[Rapstah]

If I had an Ultra-HD screen, I could technically watch 81 NTSC DVD movies at the same time in their full resolution. THAT is HD.

 

[SimleuqiR]

James Cameron doesn't care about 4K. His next movie will be shot at 48fps, believe THAT.

Will this make it look like a TV sitcom?

 

[kaching]

:lol What for when their 720p and 1080p video quality is total trash? How about you work on your codecs first, youtube.

Hey, how 'bout you work on those codecs, Mr. Negativity, and Youtube will move onto bigger fish to fry... Much bigger fish that need 25 ft screens to see frying properly.

 

[loosus]

That's neat, I guess, but honestly, the move to this resolution is not even really that noteworthy to me. I guess 1080p is just good enough for me right now. :\

 

[StuBurns]

James Cameron doesn't care about 4K. His next movie will be shot at 48fps, believe THAT.

60, lets not half arse this. Straight to the good shit.

 

[Bananakin]

Wouldn't the issue here not be so much bandwidth or codecs or diminishing returns, but more that no one has 4K screens on their computers?

 

[R2D4]

It would be faster to mail youtube your video than upload it at that size.

 

[Doodis]

:lol What for when their 720p and 1080p video quality is total trash? How about you work on your codecs first, youtube.

Thank you. I was going to post, "How about they work on not compressing the hell out of my 1080p video?"

 

[dark10x]

Resolution doesn't mean shit if the bitrate is low. High resolution, low bitrate videos are hideous.

 

[NekoFever]

4K? Pff...

Warner's been remastering its classics at 8K (4320p) where it takes up 160MB per frame and a full movie is over 20TB. I want Wizard of Oz on that, please.

Spoiler

Good luck making an 8K master of a digitally shot movie. Yay for film!

 

[StuBurns]

4K? Pff...

Warner's been remastering its classics at 8K (4320p) where it takes up 160MB per frame and a full movie is over 20TB. I want Wizard of Oz on that, please.

Spoiler

Good luck making an 8K master of a digitally shot movie. Yay for film!

35mm doesn't have any where near 8K worth of data. You might get significant benefit from some 65mm stuff like 2001, but for the most part, it's pointless.

 

[ColR100]

Those are some nice numbers, but seriously, they can't even get 720p & 1080p resolutions to run smoothly for their users. :lol

 

[chumps]

60, lets not half arse this. Straight to the good shit.

That would be terrible . High FPS is only good for slow motion. RED EPIC for example has burst fps rates in the 200's.

At high frame rates film simply no longer looks like film.

RE: 35mm, it resolves around 3k worth of measurable resolution.

 

[judhudson]

Frrannnkkkk'ssss 2000 inch tv. Everyone come and see, it's Frank's 2000 inch tv.

 

[StuBurns]

That would be terrible . High FPS is only good for slow motion. RED EPIC for example has burst fps rates in the 200's.

At high frame rates film simply no longer looks like film.

Such limited thinking. Considering there have been basically no films shot at higher framerates, to already write the concept off is very strange. The limited material done at higher framerates, such as IMAX HD (only 48fps) things, have been very well received.

There is some Avatar footage done at 60fps, not been released yet, but I would not be surprised to see it on a bluray special edition at some point, and I don't doubt it is breathtaking. Cameron's complaints about motion artifacting and strobbing are completely correct. Of course you could just not have quick pans or falling debris, play within the limits of the 24fps, or we could just bin that shit and move on.

 

[curls]

3K and 4K are what excite me most in the future of "HD".

people that are impressed by those "retina" displays on their iPhones know that these resolutions are damn near retina displays for big ass televisions.

WANT.

will upgrade when this technology becomes available on TV at a reasonable price. not before (fuck 3D).

Unless you plan to gaze at your TV right up close like you do when looking at an oil painting then no. It's pointless for a TV viewed from a couch.

 

[giga]

Cool, now how about you fellas add some servers and lift your bitrate caps.

 

[Goldrusher]

Anything for their clients.

Meanwhile, the users suffer.

- they removed the ability to disable comments
- they removed the "dim" feature where everything but the video gets dimmed
- their search is terrible; every time you enter a new term, the parameters reset
- even the lowest resolution video sometimes fails to buffer / load / stream properly
- half the official content isn't viewable outside of the US
- etc.

 

[SapientWolf]

:lol What for when their 720p and 1080p video quality is total trash? How about you work on your codecs first, youtube.

Yeah, 720p doesn't look anything close to actual 720p video. It's not even DVD quality.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0m1XmvBey8

yowza that's choppy on my PC

 

[Haunted]

:lol What for when their 720p and 1080p video quality is total trash? How about you work on your codecs first, youtube.

Seriously.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0m1XmvBey8

yowza that's choppy on my PC

That's a nice slideshow.

fake edit: wait shit, that's supposed to be a video?

"But will it run 4K youtube vids" is the new "but will it run Crysis maxed out".

 

[Okin]

I actually color-graded and helped finish a project shot for youtube to demonstrate the 4k feature. I don't know if it's enabled yet, but you can check out the video here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BQmjYlsV6A