I'm sure the 1080p encodes, even with smaller file sizes, are superior, as a brief look at a couple of mine appears to confirm. Still, it's surprising that they double the pixel count and kept the file size nearly steady (in some cases even shrank it).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Low 1080p bit rates - 720p files bigger than 1080p files on iTunes
- Thread starter AwesomeD
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I guess all the 720p encodes are still designed to work with ATV1, which was substantially less capable than the ATV2 and needed higher bitrates to get comparable results. I would hope that the similarities in file sizes points to the relative inefficiency of the 720p encodes rather than there being anything particularly wrong with the High Profile 1080p ones.
Thanks
Thank you for the assistance with my question. In checking iTunes preferences, I do see the option to choose between 720p and 1080p content. Much appreciated.
But as this thread makes distinct mention of, also that there is very little difference in file sizes between the two. It seems that either Apple has some fantastic new algorithm, or just offering 1080p in not much more than name only.
In reading the referenced article on this, it appears there is some improvement, but not as much as might be expected, or possible.
Although it seems most movies are still in 720p, most appreciated that Apple has allowed the option of upgrading previously purchased TV content for free.
Should be interesting to do some side by side comparisons.
Thank you for the assistance with my question. In checking iTunes preferences, I do see the option to choose between 720p and 1080p content. Much appreciated.
But as this thread makes distinct mention of, also that there is very little difference in file sizes between the two. It seems that either Apple has some fantastic new algorithm, or just offering 1080p in not much more than name only.
In reading the referenced article on this, it appears there is some improvement, but not as much as might be expected, or possible.
Although it seems most movies are still in 720p, most appreciated that Apple has allowed the option of upgrading previously purchased TV content for free.
Should be interesting to do some side by side comparisons.
Can you please elaborate on this? I'm not sure the point you're trying to make about the source material.
Access to better source of the film than the Blu-Ray producers?
Hold up-- iTunes has access to a better source of the film than the Blu-Ray producers? Huh?
On a somewhat related side note, though: funny that Apple *does* have access to HD copies of movies not even released on Blu-Ray at all... like 'Snow Falling on Cedars' (though that's only available as a rental). It's only 720p, but at 3x the resolution of the DVD, it's the best copy of the movie you can watch *anywhere* (no it's not upconverted DVD, if you do a side-by-side comparison). Which is pretty sad, actually.
As much as I love what Apple's trying to do here, I still find issues like banding in dark scenes problematic. Especially when viewed on a large screen, e.g. when using a projector. This is where Blu-Ray still can't be beat for quality. One day it will see it's end, for sure... just not now.
On the bright side, it seems Apple has very good practices in terms of allowing you to upgrade your library for free. That makes me feel pretty secure purchasing from Apple, even though the quality may not be where I want it to be for now.
Another convenience vs. quality trade-off.
Hold up-- iTunes has access to a better source of the film than the Blu-Ray producers? Huh?
On a somewhat related side note, though: funny that Apple *does* have access to HD copies of movies not even released on Blu-Ray at all... like 'Snow Falling on Cedars' (though that's only available as a rental). It's only 720p, but at 3x the resolution of the DVD, it's the best copy of the movie you can watch *anywhere* (no it's not upconverted DVD, if you do a side-by-side comparison). Which is pretty sad, actually.
As much as I love what Apple's trying to do here, I still find issues like banding in dark scenes problematic. Especially when viewed on a large screen, e.g. when using a projector. This is where Blu-Ray still can't be beat for quality. One day it will see it's end, for sure... just not now.
On the bright side, it seems Apple has very good practices in terms of allowing you to upgrade your library for free. That makes me feel pretty secure purchasing from Apple, even though the quality may not be where I want it to be for now.
Another convenience vs. quality trade-off.
No -- iTunes has access to a better source than we do. That source is better than Blu-ray; it's the digital master. Compressing straight from the master to 1080p will give you better quality at the same bitrate than compressing to Blu-ray and then to 1080p, which is the best we consumers can do.
I came across this thread and just had to bump it because I had a good laugh reading most of these posts. Two years later and apple has proven that the move to 1080p at these bitrates is pointless. They continue to be consistently worse than their 720p counterpart across the board. The only exception is animation, which compresses well and looks fine at 5 Mbps.
Here's hoping the next apple tv will have larger internal storage so they can increase the bitrate and/or start using H.265. When Netflix is pumping out 15.6 Mbps H.265 4K, there's no reason for apple to still be using 4-5 Mbps on their 1080p offerings in 2014.
Here's hoping the next apple tv will have larger internal storage so they can increase the bitrate and/or start using H.265. When Netflix is pumping out 15.6 Mbps H.265 4K, there's no reason for apple to still be using 4-5 Mbps on their 1080p offerings in 2014.
Ahhhh, If only I could get 15.6 Mbps from Netflix! On a good day during off peak hours I rarely see even 3 Mbps.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
If you're imagining that all movies have to be <8GB to fit into the available space of the
TV, that's not true. The TV streams what it needs when it needs it. I've got some >20GB encodes that it plays just fine. Much like starting to watch a streamed film while it's still downloading on a computer, the TV buffers enough to start playing then downloads more as it will be needed. If someone could get a >100GB film assembled, I would think the TV would play it just fine.BTW, this same concept likely applies to the fallacy of needing a new
TV with bigger SSD for apps too. Just like movies, apps could be streamed from the much bigger hard drive where the movies are stored. It streams over the app to be run, runs it and then streams over another app when you want to switch from one to another. Much like RAM in iDevices is relatively small and what is to be shown on screen is streamed into it and processed on the fly, I think it would work the same with TV. Off topic but same idea.Back on topic: OP, if you want maximum quality, don't build the collection in iTunes. Buy the BD and convert them yourself. Sure there is this perception that iTunes version is being encoded from a superior master- and that may be true- but you are then at the mercy of someone else deciding variables like bitrate and others that do effect end result quality. If you buy the BD, you get to decide everything up to the limits of what an
TV can actually play, which is much higher than what you can get via iTunes.iTunes brings convenience, smaller files and the iCloud locker benefit. However, the tradeoff is Apple deciding on factors like picture quality to achieve compact file sizes. Make your own and you decide.
Last edited: