Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Apple TV and Home Theater

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Aug 21, 2012, 04:21 PM   #1
Mr Dobey
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
AppleTV 3 Tested: 60fps 1080p

I like the smooth look of 29.97fps 1080i De-interlaced and frame rate doubled (Bob, Yadif, Yadif 2X) to 59.94fps 1080p.

But, AppleTV 3 only supports 1080p@30 on their website.

So I took a 29.97fps 1080i Blu-Ray source and encoded it in Handbrake using the AppleTV3 preset and turning on De-interlace (Bob) and selecting 59.94fps and Peak Framerate (VFR) for the framerate.

I added the resulting video to my iTunes library and shared it via Home Sharing to my AppleTV and voila, it plays all frames smoothly and does not down sample to 30fps.


Hope this helps anyone who enjoys the smooth look of 59.94! (like from an HD Cable box)
Attached Files
File Type: txt 1080p@59.94.txt (4.8 KB, 306 views)
Mr Dobey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2012, 07:01 PM   #2
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
I suggest taking another look. TV does not play back 60fps. It will try but if it's truly 60fps, there is a strobey, juddering effect. I know this because I have a camcorder that shoots 1080p 60 (unique) frames per second.

Originally, I hoped the new TV could handle real 60fps playback but it couldn't. So now I render a master file at 60fps (59.94 actually) and an TV version at 30fps (29.97 actually). The master is in hope that an TV4 or 5 will eventually catch up to consumer camcorders capable of real 60fps since about 2009 or so. Frankly, it's a shame it also can't handle native 24fps as well as the much more modern audio codecs (far superior to Dolby Digital).

You may not be seeing the playback failure because you might be making a 60fps file that is only 30fps that actually change (2 copies of each frame). Maybe the strobey judder effect I observe is because of the 60fps that change (every frame)?

What I know is that I've tried everything to get my 1080p 60fps filies playing at 60fps. It just can't do it (though it will try on every file). They look fantastic on my Mac. But I have to make the 29.97 version if I want smooth playback on TV3.

Last edited by HobeSoundDarryl; Aug 21, 2012 at 07:10 PM.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2012, 07:20 PM   #3
Mr Dobey
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
What bitrate are you 60fps movies?
Mr Dobey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2012, 08:09 PM   #4
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
All under the recommended max limit- some well below. I thought of that and experimented (tripod, very uncomplicated video scenes, only small bits of the screen changing at one time). Nothing worked.

There has been an update or two to the TV3 software since launch (when I tested this) but you're the first person I've seen that believes they've got 60fps actually working with it. It's possible an update might have brought this benefit so I could test again. I just doubt that Apple would tackle that one when so much basic stuff could be addressed.

FYI: I'm also using Handbrake for the output. Typically, I'm rendering out of FCPX as ProRes, then running it through Handbrake for the master & TV3 versions. Thus, I'm very confident I don't have an encoding problem.

Last edited by HobeSoundDarryl; Aug 21, 2012 at 08:24 PM.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2012, 08:31 PM   #5
Mr Dobey
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Correct, I am not watching a true 1080p@60 source. I am watching a 1080i@30 with field doubling to get 1080p@60. So I am only getting 30 distinct frames. This may be the reason why I am having success. Have you ever tried going this route? (I'm using 30 for 29.97 and 60 for 59.94 just as shorthand)

P.S. - It's nice to finally find someone who is being respectful of the topic. I can't tell you how many times I hear "it's impossible to tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps'.
Mr Dobey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2012, 08:44 PM   #6
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Agreed on the P.S. It goes right along with the last few years where most here argued against 1080p for 720p because TV2 & 1 were Apple-capped at 720p. "Couldn't see the difference", "the chart", "until national bandwidth is built out to handle >720p streaming", blah, blah, blah. And then Apple endorses 1080p and the vast majority of that argument fades away. In fact, I've noticed some of the same people that passionately argued against 1080p in the pre-iPhone 4 and TV3 years now gush about 1080p (unless it's linked to Blu Ray and then "it"s obsolete", "wasted space on shelves", "don't want to be fumbling through discs", etc.- apparently only iTunes 1080p streams are good... or "I can't tell the difference between iTunes 1080p and BD 1080p", etc)

Curiously, over in the hundred threads about the ever-impending Apple Television, there are lots of people wanting retina resolutions and 4K or 8K video streams for that hypothetical television. I wonder where all those "can't see the difference", "the chart", "until national bandwidth..." people have gone.

Back to topic: We (those on my end) can all definitely see the difference in 60fps vs. 30fps. It is visibly smoother video (I shoot a lot of sports video). I'd love it if TV4 or 5 included the support for fps other than 29.97. That would be down to 24fps (for native film) and up to 60fps which is readily available in <$1000 camcorders since about 2009.

I haven't tried the 1080i to 1080p at 60fps conversion though I have Handbrake "decombed" older home video shot at 1080i (but only at 30fps). That does look great after having to view them at 540p or 720p all these years on previous TV models.

Last edited by HobeSoundDarryl; Aug 21, 2012 at 08:52 PM.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2012, 09:20 AM   #7
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Just in case some software updates to TV might have addressed the issue since I last tested 60fps video, I just re-tested 1080p60fps video rendered from FCPX as Pro Res then run through Handbrake with the high profile preset to yield a small .m4v file. This yielded a 59.94fps 1080p file with a 8.94mbps data rate (well below the max the TV3 can handle). This video plays just fine on my Mac.

As usual, the TV3 will play it but there is a noticeable stutter/judder- especially when the camera is panning (like a strobe effect). The exact same file run through Handbrake's high profile preset with the sole change of framerate to 29.97 yields smooth playback. If interested, this 29.97 version of the video has a 8.58mbps data rate. No surprise here- the specs for TV3 are focused on 30fps playback.

The latter version looks great via TV3 playback but I would love to see support for other fps rates in the next version(s)- particularly 24fps for film sources and up to 60fps for footage shot that way. Just about all film is shot at 24fps and 60fps camcorders have been around for several years (at less than $1000). It would be great if the hardware would support them too.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2012, 12:01 PM   #8
aapoxx
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
[QUOTE=P.S. - It's nice to finally find someone who is being respectful of the topic. I can't tell you how many times I hear "it's impossible to tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps'.[/QUOTE]

Hi ;P

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate

The human eye and its brain interface, the human visual system, can process 10 to 12 separate images per second, perceiving them individually.The visual cortex holds onto one image for about one-fifteenth of a second, so if another image is received during that period an illusion of continuity is created, allowing a sequence of still images to give the impression of motion. Early silent films had a frame rate from 14 to 24 FPS which was enough for the sense of motion, but it was perceived as jerky motion. By using projectors with dual- and triple-blade shutters the rate was multiplied two or three times as seen by the audience. Thomas Edison said that 46 frames per second was the minimum: "anything less will strain the eye."In the mid- to late-1920s, the frame rate for silent films increased to about 20 to 26 FPS.
aapoxx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2012, 05:42 PM   #9
Mr Dobey
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
to Darryl,

does 720p@60fps work for you on AppleTV?

How do you watch your 1080p@60fps content on TV? (HDMI/DVI out of your computer, rip to Blu-Ray, Popcorn Hour etc..)
Mr Dobey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2012, 07:25 PM   #10
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Haven't tried 720p60fps but I doubt it would work either. Best I understand the TV, it (tries to) convert anything you feed it to 30fps (that's pulling 24fps film up to 30 and pulling 60fps down to 30fps). Apple has decided (hopefully just for now) that 30 is the only fps that is important... much like Dolby Digital is the only surround codec that's important. Maybe when it's no longer a "hobby" they'll make one that can go fully toe-to-toe with Blu Ray hardware.

As for watching the 1080p60fps, I hook the camcorder to the HDTV (but that's only good for the recently-shot stuff). Otherwise, I've just got a building library of 1080pp60fps waiting for an TV that can play it. When it arrives- if it ever arrives- I'll jettison the 30fps copies I have for TV compatibility now. Very simply, I have 2 folders for videos shot since I added 60fps capability. One holds the 60fps and the other holds the 30fps versions. One of these days I hope to be able to just drag those 30fps folders to the trashcan.

Maybe TV5 or 7?
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2012, 07:45 PM   #11
Mr Dobey
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Ok so you never do any editing? Because even Final Cut Pro X doesn't officially support editing of 1080p@60 which is a shame (I've seen a few semi workarounds though floating around but none seem streamlined).

I can get 720p@60 files synced to my iPhone 4S through iTunes and they play with what looks like 0 dropped frames (smooth as butter), strangely my Retina MacBook Pro visibly drops a few frames even at 720p@60 in Quicktime X and Mac Blu-Ray Player. But 1080p@60 will not sync to my iPhone through iTunes.

----------

I know they're not HD but can you download the 60fps videos here and play them on your ATV and tell me if you think they are playing back at 60fps or downrated to 30fps. (I right click saved them and then added to iTunes)
Mr Dobey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2012, 09:10 PM   #12
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
I edit in FCP X all the time. It works fine with 1080p 60fps (actually 59.94). It didn't import them properly when I first tried it (but some seem to claim it does now) so I experimented until I found Clipwrap. It rewraps the raw files to Apple Pro Res. FCP X then works with that just fine. I export edited 1080p60 back out as Pro Res, then use Handbrake (or sometimes Compressor) to render the 1080p60 (actually 59.94) and 1080p30 (actually 29.97) versions.

I think iPhone 4S has more horsepower than TV3. If I'm not mistaken, 4S has both cores fully operational, while Apple turned off 1 of those cores for TV3.

I think the Retina Macbook is too much screen for the graphics cards. I believe Apple pushed too hard on retina and the graphics card makers will need laptop-destined tech to "catch up". That's just a guess but I see a lot of comments about Retina and graphics issues that seem to support that guess. Even simpler stuff like scrolling and similar seem to sometimes be an issue. I bet a few generations of graphics enhancements will resolve all such issues.

I downloaded the "action" video (motercycle jump). It's only 960x540, so not HD (it's what I call half HD). The 60fps version appeared to play smoothly on TV3 but I couldn't tell what I was seeing for sure. If I was guessing, it looked like it might have been 60fps (I didn't see the judder/strobe). But then again, Half HD vs. full HD is at play. Maybe the hardware is robust enough for 60fps at half HD resolution? Or maybe it had the horses to dynamically convert it to 30fps on the fly at half HD but chokes when trying to do the same with a 1080p60fps file?

I recall people describing version 2 trying to play 1080p but showing some stuttering as it was trying to dynamically downconvert to 720p. Maybe just too much for the hardware at higher resolutions? No way for me to definitively know. However, I'm really not very interested in achieving 60fps by dropping to 720p or 960 x 540. I'd like to see a version 4+ show up with the horses for 60fps at 1080p (even raise the Mbps max to get toe-to-toe with BD hardware, etc).

Last edited by HobeSoundDarryl; Aug 23, 2012 at 09:32 PM.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2012, 04:59 AM   #13
Michael CM1
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
So technically how does all of this compete with BD? I have known for a while that video pixel resolution is one of many things that determines quality -- hence 1080i vs. 1080p -- but it's so hard to know the details about formats because the marketing people just want you to buy into crap like "Full HD."

iTunes lists a few stats on its video files, but not much. I'm assuming the audio bit rate is 152kbps -- sad compared to every music file sold -- and the video bit rate is 4557kbps. These files also obviously don't do anything better than Dolby Digital. I get that some of this is for size sake, but if you can offer an option between 1080p and 720p, surely one can be offered for better audio and video. The audio really isn't a problem right now because of how my stuff is set up, but I'm sure plenty of people plug their Apple TV directly into a sound system that can handle DTS-HD and 800 other audio codecs. My ears can tell the difference between Dolby Digital and DTS, so this is obviously something that needs addressing before iTunes becomes some real disc-replacer.
__________________
13.3" 2014 MacBook Air; Mid-2010 21.5" iMac; silver 64GB iPhone 6; white iPad Air 32 GB; third-gen TV (x2)
Michael CM1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2012, 08:32 AM   #14
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Michael, that's a can of worms you probably don't want to try to address here... too much "whatever Apple offers is the best" adulation, even at the expense of logic, hard specs, etc.

In a nutshell, if a person wants maximum quality picture & sound, there is no contest- BD all the way. The "I can't see the difference crowd" will dismiss this statement but any objective person with reasonable knowledge of each will know it is the truth. Key advantages of BD over iTunes 1080p:
  • Much more modern, better audio codecs (Dolby Digital is a 1992 standard; much progress on movie audio has been made since 1992)
  • Flexibility on Mbps so that more actual detail is in the picture rather than being compressed out (and then dynamically invented on the de-compress).
  • fps rates other than 29.97. That gets you native film (24fps) or "butter smooth" motion (60fps).
  • You own BD media. So you can sell it or leave it to others when you die. You license iTunes media and it is sold by Apple as a nontransferrable license. Technically, it dies with you. See: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/who...ary-2012-08-23 for more.
  • Portability- you can take the BD to someone else's house and have a good chance of being able to play it on their big screen. Airplay tries to be the alternative to this but it depends on friends having necessary Apple equipment to make that go (or you bringing the extra equipment, though that means bringing things bigger than a BD disc & case).
  • If you care about it, BD has 3D playback
  • If you care about it, BD typically comes with lots of extras
  • In my experience, you can often find BDs at less cost than the same movie or show in iTunes.

The primary benefit of iTunes 1080p is convenience (of access). Some argue about the "hassles" of managing a disc collection. Some argue about the commercials at the beginning of the discs (playback). Some argue about the future (that discs are not the future). Some argue against BD just because Jobs called it a "bag of hurt". Some talk about rare scenarios (Kids with jelly, etc). Some talk about file sizes and/or bandwidth issues. Some talk about "The Human Eye can't see the fine detail from average seating distances..." arbitrarily ignoring all the other variables that go into what a human eye can and cannot see. But the biggest pro-iTunes argument is the "I can't see the difference" argument (so apparently you can't see the difference either). Note that this last one just slides with whatever Apple decides is the current standard (for example, the same argument flew for years when Apple chose to stick with 720p over 1080i or 1080p).

Bottom line: for someone concerned with maximum picture quality & sound, there is no contest at all. For someone concerned about other features & benefits besides those, logical & illogical arguments and rationale can- and will- fly in abundance. Asking about this here will just get you mostly overwhelming arguments pro-Apple.

Last edited by HobeSoundDarryl; Aug 24, 2012 at 09:36 AM.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2012, 11:58 AM   #15
Mr Dobey
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Quick note: for those who don't know, Remux can transcode TrueHD/DTS MA 24 -bit 96kHz Audio from a Blu-Ray MKV (makemkv)to Apples Lossless and then put the audio/video files in an .m4v file that plays smoothly on ATV3. Voila Lossless Blu-Ray Playback on ATV. (Note Remux needs a slight code tweak to do this put I can send it to you if interested).

Though, just because the audio is playing I don't know if it's being outputted at 24bit 96kHz or downgraded to 16-bit 48kHz considering there's only an option for 16-bit in the ATV settings.
Mr Dobey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2012, 02:07 PM   #16
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Dobey View Post
Quick note: for those who don't know, Remux can transcode TrueHD/DTS MA 24 -bit 96kHz Audio from a Blu-Ray MKV (makemkv)to Apples Lossless and then put the audio/video files in an .m4v file that plays smoothly on ATV3. Voila Lossless Blu-Ray Playback on ATV. (Note Remux needs a slight code tweak to do this put I can send it to you if interested).
Are you sure about it playing back on TV? That would be news to me. Sure, one can put a lossless quality audio file in the .m4v file container but playback is a different story. I can find a lot of web search results that say TV won't play TrueHD/DTS MA, so I'm confident about that. I can see some references to transcoding to Apple lossless but I'm not seeing something definitive that one could transcode TrueHD or DTS MA to Apple Lossless, then put that in a video file and the movie will play with lossless surround. Can you confirm you have that working yourself or have you just read that somewhere? If the latter, where?

The Remux site only says it will convert it to AAC or AC3. I suppose that can mean AAC lossless (though Apple lossless is not AAC, so I don't think that would make sense) but the specs say that AAC has a limitation of 160Kbps. If Remux could deliver true lossless surround for movies that would play back on TV, that would be a big deal to the purists. I'd love to find out that that is true myself.

Last edited by HobeSoundDarryl; Aug 24, 2012 at 02:12 PM.
HobeSoundDarryl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2012, 02:19 PM   #17
mic j
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Might want to check this out: https://discussions.apple.com/thread...art=0&tstart=0

The way I read it, is that the optical doesn't do anything over 16bit even when the source is 24bit. But this is not my strong area.
__________________
17" MBP '09, 2.66 GHz, 8GB RAM; 13" MBP (Retina) '12, 2.5GHz, 8GB RAM; iPad 2, 32GB; iPhone 5s; AE; AppleTV 3; AEBS w 1TB Seagate HDD; 65" Mits DLP, Sony STR-DB1070 AVR
mic j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2012, 02:19 PM   #18
CSpackler
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
If anyone uses a Pioneer plasma with ATV, set the film mode to Advance.

It detects and converts film-based material that has been converted to video by 3:2 pulldown back to 24p @ 72hz by using inverse telecine.

So you can watch movies and tv originally encoded @ 30 fps in true 24p without judder. It works well.
CSpackler is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2012, 04:17 PM   #19
Menneisyys2
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by HobeSoundDarryl View Post
apparently only iTunes 1080p streams are good...
Yup, another funny statement of Apple blind fanboys. The truth is something else: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1340463 (something always worth point those fanboys to ).

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by HobeSoundDarryl View Post
Michael, that's a can of worms you probably don't want to try to address here... too much "whatever Apple offers is the best" adulation, even at the expense of logic, hard specs, etc.

In a nutshell, if a person wants maximum quality picture & sound, there is no contest- BD all the way. The "I can't see the difference crowd" will dismiss this statement but any objective person with reasonable knowledge of each will know it is the truth. Key advantages of BD over iTunes 1080p:
  • Much more modern, better audio codecs (Dolby Digital is a 1992 standard; much progress on movie audio has been made since 1992)
  • Flexibility on Mbps so that more actual detail is in the picture rather than being compressed out (and then dynamically invented on the de-compress).
  • fps rates other than 29.97. That gets you native film (24fps) or "butter smooth" motion (60fps).
  • You own BD media. So you can sell it or leave it to others when you die. You license iTunes media and it is sold by Apple as a nontransferrable license. Technically, it dies with you. See: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/who...ary-2012-08-23 for more.
  • Portability- you can take the BD to someone else's house and have a good chance of being able to play it on their big screen. Airplay tries to be the alternative to this but it depends on friends having necessary Apple equipment to make that go (or you bringing the extra equipment, though that means bringing things bigger than a BD disc & case).
  • If you care about it, BD has 3D playback
  • If you care about it, BD typically comes with lots of extras
  • In my experience, you can often find BDs at less cost than the same movie or show in iTunes.

The primary benefit of iTunes 1080p is convenience (of access). Some argue about the "hassles" of managing a disc collection. Some argue about the commercials at the beginning of the discs (playback). Some argue about the future (that discs are not the future). Some argue against BD just because Jobs called it a "bag of hurt". Some talk about rare scenarios (Kids with jelly, etc). Some talk about file sizes and/or bandwidth issues. Some talk about "The Human Eye can't see the fine detail from average seating distances..." arbitrarily ignoring all the other variables that go into what a human eye can and cannot see. But the biggest pro-iTunes argument is the "I can't see the difference" argument (so apparently you can't see the difference either). Note that this last one just slides with whatever Apple decides is the current standard (for example, the same argument flew for years when Apple chose to stick with 720p over 1080i or 1080p).

Bottom line: for someone concerned with maximum picture quality & sound, there is no contest at all. For someone concerned about other features & benefits besides those, logical & illogical arguments and rationale can- and will- fly in abundance. Asking about this here will just get you mostly overwhelming arguments pro-Apple.
Absolutely agreed. Also worth adding to the list is the rarity (ad the, compared to true subs, ugly appearance when it's even present) of closed captioning, as opposed to BR (DVD, DVB etc.) subs. (Almost all BR discs have subs, while about 5-10% of the movies in the iTunes Store have CC's.) This is why (a non-native English speaker needing subs / CC's for 100% understanding) I don't bother with iTunes Store's stuff - in addition to the ones you've mentioned (considerably better IQ when directly ripping BR's etc.)
Menneisyys2 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2012, 12:37 AM   #20
Michael CM1
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by HobeSoundDarryl View Post
Michael, that's a can of worms you probably don't want to try to address here... too much "whatever Apple offers is the best" adulation, even at the expense of logic, hard specs, etc.

In a nutshell, if a person wants maximum quality picture & sound, there is no contest- BD all the way. The "I can't see the difference crowd" will dismiss this statement but any objective person with reasonable knowledge of each will know it is the truth. Key advantages of BD over iTunes 1080p:
  • Much more modern, better audio codecs (Dolby Digital is a 1992 standard; much progress on movie audio has been made since 1992)
  • Flexibility on Mbps so that more actual detail is in the picture rather than being compressed out (and then dynamically invented on the de-compress).
  • fps rates other than 29.97. That gets you native film (24fps) or "butter smooth" motion (60fps).
  • You own BD media. So you can sell it or leave it to others when you die. You license iTunes media and it is sold by Apple as a nontransferrable license. Technically, it dies with you. See: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/who...ary-2012-08-23 for more.
  • Portability- you can take the BD to someone else's house and have a good chance of being able to play it on their big screen. Airplay tries to be the alternative to this but it depends on friends having necessary Apple equipment to make that go (or you bringing the extra equipment, though that means bringing things bigger than a BD disc & case).
  • If you care about it, BD has 3D playback
  • If you care about it, BD typically comes with lots of extras
  • In my experience, you can often find BDs at less cost than the same movie or show in iTunes.

The primary benefit of iTunes 1080p is convenience (of access). Some argue about the "hassles" of managing a disc collection. Some argue about the commercials at the beginning of the discs (playback). Some argue about the future (that discs are not the future). Some argue against BD just because Jobs called it a "bag of hurt". Some talk about rare scenarios (Kids with jelly, etc). Some talk about file sizes and/or bandwidth issues. Some talk about "The Human Eye can't see the fine detail from average seating distances..." arbitrarily ignoring all the other variables that go into what a human eye can and cannot see. But the biggest pro-iTunes argument is the "I can't see the difference" argument (so apparently you can't see the difference either). Note that this last one just slides with whatever Apple decides is the current standard (for example, the same argument flew for years when Apple chose to stick with 720p over 1080i or 1080p).

Bottom line: for someone concerned with maximum picture quality & sound, there is no contest at all. For someone concerned about other features & benefits besides those, logical & illogical arguments and rationale can- and will- fly in abundance. Asking about this here will just get you mostly overwhelming arguments pro-Apple.
Thanks for the info. I like the quality of the two HD movies I have bought. I can even deal with the hassles in playing them elsewhere. What bugged me was the fact that those movies can't be transferred. Considering the fact that I'm getting an inferior product that I can duplicate with an external BD drive and the right know-how, I think I'll stick to BD from here unless Apple gets better.

I also don't get why iTunes extras don't work on Apple TV of all things.
__________________
13.3" 2014 MacBook Air; Mid-2010 21.5" iMac; silver 64GB iPhone 6; white iPad Air 32 GB; third-gen TV (x2)
Michael CM1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2012, 06:23 PM   #21
Mr Dobey
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
@Daryyle

I'll check when I get home in about a week. Though there's really no way of me proving wether 24-bit audio is being played back or down sampled to 16-bit.

pertaining to all the iTunes/Blu-Ray talk,

Could I A/B test the two sources and be confident about which is which? Most likely not. Do I still want the best quality I can get my hands on because it may enhance my viewing experience? Yes.
Mr Dobey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2012, 12:36 PM   #22
Menneisyys2
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Today, I've conducted some serious tests, including a "natural" panning camera video and the 1080p60 version of my previous counter synthetic benchmark (available for download at https://dl.dropbox.com/u/13100693/ht...60-counter.mp4 )

Unfortunately, the ATV3 indeed isn't able to render 1080p59.94 video with the same fluidity as the iPad 2/3.

While the playback of the 1080p60 counter (original video shot at 120 fps at https://dl.dropbox.com/u/13100693/ht...%20counter.MOV ) didn't show any dropped frames, the 1080p59.94 video did: the 120 fps shot at https://dl.dropbox.com/u/13100693/ht...4%20scroll.MOV certainly shows a very ugly stutter at 0:35. Both videos were pre-cached on the ATV3; that is, I only started playback after the ATV3 completely downloading the movies first.

Compare that to the iPad 3 test shot of the same video: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/13100693/ht...4%20scroll.MOV . Absolutely no stuttering: yes, iPads have far more powerful video rendering.

EDIT: I've tested the panning video on my iPad 1 too. Definitely worse (more stuttering, particularly at the last quarter of the video) than on the ATV3. That is, the ATV3 is somewhere between the iPad1 and the 2/3, the latter two having exactly the same video rendering performance.

EDIT 2: I've commented out the URL's of the second set of benchmarks.

EDIT 3: URL's are back.

Last edited by Menneisyys2; Sep 4, 2012 at 03:53 PM.
Menneisyys2 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2012, 05:44 PM   #23
Cobra611
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Beacon, NY
I own a 3 year old Samsung 55" LCD with, I believe, 120hz. I was disappointed when watching my newly ripped Blu Ray collection (thanks to MKV & Handbrake), because of that "strobey, juddering effect". I was driving me crazy! So, after reading the first few posts of this thread, I decided to turn off the "Auto Motion Plus" completely on my tv, and the fixed the problem immediately! So, now I can enjoy the fruits of my labor with seeing that annoying judder!!!!

Thanks for starting this thread!
Cobra611 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2012, 10:16 PM   #24
Mr Dobey
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
@Menneisyys

Can you post the original 120fps file?
Mr Dobey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2012, 01:12 AM   #25
Menneisyys2
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Dobey View Post
@Menneisyys

Can you post the original 120fps file?
There's no such file as the iOS (Mac) hardware can only play back up to 60 fps. 120 fps is the speed I've made my benchmarks to be able to easily spot dropped frames in the 60 fps playback - see my post on this subject at http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost...4&postcount=21

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cobra611 View Post
I own a 3 year old Samsung 55" LCD with, I believe, 120hz. I was disappointed when watching my newly ripped Blu Ray collection (thanks to MKV & Handbrake), because of that "strobey, juddering effect". I was driving me crazy! So, after reading the first few posts of this thread, I decided to turn off the "Auto Motion Plus" completely on my tv, and the fixed the problem immediately! So, now I can enjoy the fruits of my labor with seeing that annoying judder!!!!

Thanks for starting this thread!
This may have been completely unrelated to the ATV - after all, all BR discs (and, consequently, rips) today are 24 fps, except for some documentary ones. It's only some broadcast companies that do use motion compensation when airing some high-grade movies. For example, in Finland, "300" was aired after(!!) applying a frame-doubling motion compensation, combined with interlacing. The results were phenomenal.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael CM1 View Post
I also don't get why iTunes extras don't work on Apple TV of all things.
I wondered the same - after all, they're plain (DRM'ed, of course) MOV files inside. Unfortunately, if you do directly transfer / synch them to the iPad (ATV), they won't be played back.

All you could (haven't tested this personally but I don't think it wouldn't work) do is remove the DRM for iOS playback.
Menneisyys2 is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Apple TV and Home Theater

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Unable to play 1080p content on AppleTV chenks Apple TV and Home Theater 12 Apr 15, 2013 08:02 AM
1080p/720p 50/60fps... SpitUK Digital Video 3 Dec 5, 2012 09:28 AM
Handbrake: iPad vs AppleTV vs AppleTV 2 vs AppleTV 3 presettings rrk100 Apple TV and Home Theater 4 Nov 11, 2012 06:04 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:29 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC