Sites like YouTube deliberately re-encode and compress old videos to make them look worse than they actually were.
So?
>lust provoking question>time wasting image
i feel like they have been using ai to upscale anime ops uploaded in the late 2000s.
>>110194753You're right.
>>110194753They don't, we all just had smaller screens on smaller inches back then.
>>110194972old crt's were laptop sizes anon. old yt videos look fucking horrendous, like it lower than 144p
yes but they are quite good at ithave you tried re-encode webm to h264
>>110194753Use SI to fix it then
Yes, without a doubt. Some videos that were once quite clear are unwatchable, even on old screens, which I still primarily use.
ITT: faggot larpers born after 2006
>>110194753fgsfds
>>110194753does youtube do the tiktok thing where if a video gets old, you can't download it in the highest quality possible that it was when it was first released?
>>110197679you cant download any video in its original highest quality if you uploaded something in 2010 it will have been transcoded 3-4 times by now, every time from the best previous encode..inherently lossy system.>>110194753cameras really sucked until relatively recently, zoomerthey deliberately re-encode to save space not to make them look worse, what would be the point in that?
>>110194753And Suigintou is my personal onahole.
>>110194753do you have any evidence or proof of this happening
>>110194753They have to save the bandwidth for more important videos like 500 shorts of some chink making egg rolls where the video cuts rapidly when the ingredients are thrown on the table
>>110199519https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQOpposite example: this one was deliberately replaced with a higher-quality version.
>>110194753>tranime
>>110200992Anime site.
no fucking shit, video encoding and video in general went to hell the moment we stopped using x264, which is fucking god-tier encoding software. h264 > av1, simple as. svt-av1 is corpo crap anyway, it only exists to make it cheaper for them to serve video while still asking $$$ for ad-free access. suck my balls.
>>110197653based
>six fingersI am starting to have AI fatigue.
>>110201468Showing your newfriend status, that's a very well-known animation error.
>>110201262agreed. please bring back h264 so i can use my broadcom crystal and watch hd video on literally any hardware in existence
also default quality is 480p for not logged users, seems they went full nazi
>>110194814kys retard
>>110199525The irony is that back then the internet/YT was mostly white. As white countries in meatspace filled up with browns, so did the series of tubes/YT. They are drowning out everything, which is by kosher design ofc
>>110204314Monetization killed the free web entirely, everyone's just grifting for money online
How many times do you schizos have to be proven wrong before you stop sneaking back in weeks later pretending you weren't blown the fuck out last time you posted your schizophrenic nonsense? You're just as bad as the crtfags and the lightbulbschizos. >see newer videos encoded at the source and by youtube at higher resolution and bitrates>the old videos (youtube used to be 480x360 flash videos with mono audio btw, dumb zoomer) from when 720p, 480p via &fmt=18 being appended to the URL, etc. were the top quality level look worse by comparison>HURR DURR DEY RE EN CO DAAANG MUH VIDYAS MUH H264 MUH OUTDATED SHITCODECSBrain damaged fucking retards.
>>110197718> if you uploaded something in 2010 it will have been transcoded 3-4 times by now, every time from the best previous encode..inherently lossy system.you gotta be actually beyond retardation to believe this, this would not only result in absurd levels of generational loss (of course) but it will have negated all of the bandwidth savings that come with modern encodes.youtube keeps the original file, period, this isn't a secret or anything, literally just use google takeout for your account and you'll get the originally uploaded file every time, wake up.
>>110201262>variance boost doesn't existretard>it only exists to make it cheaper for them to serve video while still asking $$$ for ad-free access. suck my balls.as if h264 wasn't literally created for mostly the same end goal...
>>110201006tranime cope
>>110207467Anime has been mainstream for ages, it's not sekrit clubhouse anymore
>>110207467
>>110194753Yes, if you have any old YouTube video downloaded, its pretty clear they shit on old videos on the site from some time ago.
>>110194753they look worse due to generational losses as videos from the flash player days (<=2010) used codecs no longer supported by youtube such as sorensen spark and vp6 (the ones flash used)
>>110207486>>110207490not an argument
>>110194972No they absolutely do reincode old videos, multiple times at this point. And the sad thing is, the videos are now even larger than they were originally whilst looking worse.
>>110209066>>110209949yup, another 2 retards that unironically believe youtube constantly re-encodes videos incrementallysee >>110204829also funny both these tards believe youtube shouldn't make a single transcode of such videos... how the fuck are they supposed to serve you the original when those old crusty ass codecs have no support in any browser or any platform whatsoever?
