4k Video Looks Awful in Sample Videos

[Skyhawk21]

Sorry guys I did not try to hijack this thread, and I am no way trying to say not buy an iPhone 6s and enjoy the 4k video and 12MP pictures...

The OP thread author stated, in so far the samples uploaded to YouTube of 4k 30fps video from the newest Apple iPhone 6s's, that they do not have the vibrant, vivid, sharpness, details and POP that Samsung Galaxy phones can pick up with their sensors on the back of their Android phones.

Seriously if anyone wants to send me a 6s (I still want one because Apple knows how to optimize apps, background processes and get you the best battery life from the magic battery in your device that itis capable of). I would compare raw video clips from it at the same location, same time of day, same ambient environmental natural light and shadows. Using default settings from my Note 3 or Galaxy S5 (Note 3 sensor better trust me even though its 12MP 4:3 ratio and not 16MP 16:9 ratio) with no editing whatsoever at all!

Photography and 4k video filming was a hobby of mine although as you can see I am a pro with hardware and the ins and outs of technical details but I am an amateur at video with shaky hands and not using devices to steady a camera...

So to agree with the OP (once again not trying to start a war or fight about the iPhone 6s compared to other phones out there) but I did go out today with my trusty old a$$ Note 3 and boy it caught some amazing video. Of course thats viewing the raw clips at home on my pro calibrated E-IPS 1080p 60hz monitor.

Uploaded them to YouTube for your viewing pleasure and its only for comparison sake to what comes out of the 12MP sensor on the new iPhone's that can record 4k video. Samsung, Android, or Touch Wiz does very well at live processing of 4k video in well lit environments and not to bad in medium to darker environments. Of course as I said before its no expensive Panasonic 4k 20.1MP camera... Should of brought that today too, but it weighs so dam much and does not fit in a pocket or even a car (J/K)

Check these out in either 1080p, 1440p, 2160p on a good monitor, screen and or TV!!!

Links:

Let me know what you all think and your perceptions compared to what comes out of the iPhone's!

 

[Razeus]

...OP posts samples from Youtube and wonders why 4k doesn't look that good. My mind is now numb.

 

[plopbellie]

Here's the thing. Every. Single. 4K. Video. posted on youtube has the blocky-ness. iPhone has it. The Note has it. That drone in the forest has it. Its clearly a youtube thing.

As for the colors, samsung is know to make colors look more vibrant than they really are, because they look better to most people that way. Apple tries to capture what the eye sees. If you want a more colorful picture, samsung. want a more 'real life' picture, get an iphone.

Seriously. It's cool to debate, but when every video used as evidence for one way or another looks like crap because youtube kills the clarity, it doesn't matter how good the camera is, youtube will not show it right.

 

[fiber0pti]

Here's the thing. Every. Single. 4K. Video. posted on youtube has the blocky-ness. iPhone has it. The Note has it. That drone in the forest has it. Its clearly a youtube thing.

I'm not sure what you're seeing, but I'm not seeing "blocky-ness" in many 4K videos on youtube. I more suspect the reviewers process before uploading to youtube.

One example I can give is footage of a baseball game and you can see the compression on the grass area. Instead of a smooth gradient it's clearly compressed as the gradient is choppy.

 

[jmantn]

on my 27 inch iMac that first video when I changed to quality to 4K was outstanding.

 

[EJ8]

Some people are never satisfied.

 

[Skyhawk21]

Apparently none of you even bothered to watch my clips I spent time today making to show that 4k on YouTube does look good if you know how to film on any device. By the way if your using a slow ass PC or MAC that cannot hardware decode 4k its gonna look like crap off the bat if you even try it on YouTube.

Furthermore Adobe Flash sucks and screws it up thats why all new OS's and browsers support HTML5. So go watch the Note 3 clips in an HTML5 browser at full screen in 4k on a system that can handle it at 30fps or more, and tell me where you see NOISE, BLOCKINESS, or any UNSHARP texture or anything (artifacts) in the videos I uploaded in comparison with the crap 4k videos from an iPhone on YouTube. None of my videos had digital blocking (squares/noise) during movement of water in my clips. The iPhone 6s 4k video had major artifacts during camera movement and scenery movement and does not even record at a steady 30fps. Apple likes to use 29.970 fps or lower. Not to mention any video taken with any apple device only uses one microphone in mono center mode with a low ass bit-rate for audio, why I have no dam idea.

Anyhow on my kick ass super PC using Windows 7, Windows 8 & 10 in VM's on SSDs with nvidia gpus with hardware that decodes 4k on the fly, even the crappy re-compressed 4k video from my Note 3 looks damn good on YouTube in full screen at 2160p and 1080p for that matter. This all on a perfectly calibrated E-IPS 22" panel manufactured 2015 that is 1920x1080p. If you cannot notice the difference between 4k video and 1080p, you must have crappy vision problems or need new glasses because 4k video IS LIFE LIKE meaning take your eyes off the 4k video quality and screen and look at the same scene with the naked eye and its the exact same. 1920x1080p is a blurry unsharp mess that is no where near life like to the naked eye.

Sorry but I just do not get people. You show them something that is reality to compare to something else and they still cant agree maybe it is better or not but in the long run does not matter when it comes to personal preference.

Wish I had a 6s plus in my hand to benchmark and analyze it compared to my old ass Note 3 and the same camera sensor, then maybe people would agree on the results.

P.S. Samsung does not intentionally make the camera sensor saturate colors more, if you were physically with me today filming the first clip up above in this thread, WITH THE SUN SHINNING from directly above the flowers to the naked eye were that vivid in color at a perfect 6500-6600 color temp. The better the sensor in the camera, the more "realistically" it allows light and color in to replicate what the eye can see. No special settings were used to make the videos I took today, to look better. The sensor did all of that at hardware level at default settings. Should of taken my 1,000 dollar camera and recorded the same scene. THE COLORS AND LIGHT would be even more perfect and vivid compared to real life then someone would say its software or editing that did that.

People have a long way to go when it comes to learning or researching how something operates technically, physically & naturally to include physics and reality. In other words technology and camera sensors digitally have come a long way from when they were first invented. The whole idea was to capture a moment on film being a still or moving picture to be able to look back upon as a memory especially when our brains start to slowly wither away to include memory.

Anyhow cameras today are suppose to be as close as we can as man to replicate what the human eye is capable of. Will we ever achieve that? We may get closer and closer but if you believe in a high power who created us, then we will never scientifically be able to replicate 100 percent or recreate the human eyes that God gave us as a gift.

I apologize for my rants and biased attitudes. I just want to stay on the technical side of things and compare two gadgets. The best I could do was with what I had and I think my Note 3 with 4k video creation did a good job today and it does look better (my perception and others) than what Apple has finally caught up to doing with their technology.

I do own three apple devices and still want a dam iPhone despite if the new 4k feature is good or sucks. I have Android devices galore, got PC and windows crap. I am an IT TECH and need to have everything to learn the ins and outs of hardware and software as part of my hobby and hopefully one day line of work (I am disabled).

 

[samcheezay]

^ drops the mic (fingers on the keyboard) and logs off.

 

[fiber0pti]

Skyhawk21, I should have said something. I appreciate you doing all that work. I agree, your videos look great. Which is why I think there's some question, at least for me, what process the reviewers of the 6s went through before uploading to youtube because they don't look as good as the footage available on Apple's website or other available 4k youtube footage.

 

[Travisimo]

I wonder if the 4k samples that have been uploaded so far have been compressed on device before uploading to Youtube? If were they downloaded to a PC first then uploaded to Youtube? I know a lot of times when you share a video from the device itself, it automatically compresses the crap out of it, even though it keeps the same resolution. Given that there are 4k videos on Youtube with movement that look good, it could be the compression during upload, or it could be the compression of the video capture itself.

 

[5errated]

One of the reviews I read yesterday (don't remember which) compared the 4k video recording to the s6 and they said the s6 distorted the video and the colors weren't accurate, and much preferred the iphone 4k.

I own the s6 edge+, and am getting my 6s plus tomorrow, so I'll do some comparisons.

 

[plopbellie]

No, again your wrong. You keep writing these page long posts, but it doesn't change anything. Your VERY own video shows the exact blockyness that i am talking about. Look around the rear tire well. Block city. It doesnt matter how good your footage is, ITS YOUTUBE. Maybe your biased because you want your own work to stand out or something, but the fact is, as seen, is that every 4k video that has been posted on this page as proof in either direction has this nasty low bitrate looking crap youtube calls a 4K video.

Id also like to point of how you assume that anyone who doesnt agree with you mus have old pc hardware. Like, what does that have to do with anything? Any PC from the last 3 years should handle a 4k stream fairly well, especially such a crap looking youtube stream. Im not arguing with you about your hardware. You could have the best hardware on the planet, but that doesnt change what the finished video looks like on youtube. And when people keep saying 'this camera is better, look at this video' even though all the videos have the same issue, you would think someone would be smart enough to point out that it's not the hardware, it's about youtube compression.

 

[DblHelix]

The Galaxy S6 colors look significantly less muted than the iPhone 6s, there is much more detail, and sharpness is surprisingly also very much superior.

Samsung is known to punch up the colors. iPhone is more accurate which some would say makes it less stunning

 

[MICHAELSD]

Anyhow cameras today are suppose to be as close as we can as man to replicate what the human eye is capable of. Will we ever achieve that? We may get closer and closer but if you believe in a high power who created us, then we will never scientifically be able to replicate 100 percent or recreate the human eyes that God gave us as a gift.

Cinema cameras can already achieve better results than the human eye. These days your display matters more than the camera used. I think most displays suck for video because contrast isn't perfect (I own a Pioneer Kuro TV -- the best of the best for perfect contrast). The iPhone display sucks for TV/movies. Still awaiting OLED.

 

[StarShot]

are you watching on a 4k screen? Does a 4k video look any different than a 1080P video on a 1080P display?

I'm new to this whole 4k thing but it seems like there are a lot of variables that go into this one... just a thought...

Without more information, this whole tread is STUPID. My understand for 4K video is that it takes a 4K display to view it correctly. So, the news IP6 takes 4K. Probably looks sharp on replay ON A 6S iPhone. Who has one yet? Did the OP do a Super Man and fly around the world in 2 days, somehow arriving in the future on the 27th?

NOT enough information here and besides, I'll go along with the replies that say the attach videos look fine to me.

 

[oldwren]

Sounds like you are a fan of popping vivid colors. I don't see much difference in clarity or detail.

Especially because it's cloudy in the videos.

 

[t0mat0]

Wonder if the lady who got hers early could provide some?

Without more information, this whole tread is STUPID. My understand for 4K video is that it takes a 4K display to view it correctly. So, the news IP6 takes 4K. Probably looks sharp on replay ON A 6S iPhone. Who has one yet? Did the OP do a Super Man and fly around the world in 2 days, somehow arriving in the future on the 27th?

NOT enough information here and besides, I'll go along with the replies that say the attach videos look fine to me.

Agree people need to wait 2 days. (You can zoom in on the footage when replaying the 4k shot, to see 1/4 of the 4K, effectively seeing it native resolution on a 1080p screen of the 6 Plus)

 

[Advil]

I use an iPhone 6 plus to shoot YouTube videos and they look much better than the samples because of a few reasons:

1. I remove them from my phone without any compression
2. I export them from Final Cut with as little compression as possible
3. I upload to youtube and only let THAT compression take place since I have no say in that

I also use an app (filmic pro or moviepro) to record at a higher bit rate. But they look wayyyy better than the 4k samples because these people are exporting them with a ton of compression.

 

[MH01]

Every Galaxy S6 4K video I've seen has blown me away. Was expecting Apple to do even better. Seriously, this looks at least twice as good as the sample videos we've seen so far.

This video looks like it's been professionally edited. Be good to see comparisons with people who own both the S6 and 6S , shooting the same objects

 

[masotime]

Uploaded them to YouTube for your viewing pleasure and its only for comparison sake to what comes out of the 12MP sensor on the new iPhone's that can record 4k video. Samsung, Android, or Touch Wiz does very well at live processing of 4k video in well lit environments and not to bad in medium to darker environments. Of course as I said before its no expensive Panasonic 4k 20.1MP camera... Should of brought that today too, but it weighs so dam much and does not fit in a pocket or even a car (J/K)

Those are some nice clips. You can stabilize the video in iMovie, no need to use Final Cut Pro - and I'd recommend anyone else taking 4k video to do the same. 1080p video seems to have built in stabilization, so post-processing is usually not needed.

I'd definitely agree that a dedicated video-camera would be great, but it's a pain portability wise. However, one big thing about a dedicated videocam is that you can zoom. When you start using the zoom, you realize how useful it is to focus the camera on a specific scene / object. On the flip side, a zoomed in shot means that shakiness has a greater effect.

BTW doesn't YouTube video management come with free video stabilization? Have you tried that option?

 

[CE3]

Galaxy S6 4K footage looks excellent until you move the camera. The OIS for video is not good for handheld footage and creates a sort of wobbly warp effect. It looks bad and is really distracting.

The 6 & 6S digital/cinematic stabilization and the 6S+ with its OIS do a much better job of keeping handheld footage steady and natural looking.

 

[masotime]

I use an iPhone 6 plus to shoot YouTube videos and they look much better than the samples because of a few reasons:

1. I remove them from my phone without any compression
2. I export them from Final Cut with as little compression as possible
3. I upload to youtube and only let THAT compression take place since I have no say in that

I also use an app (filmic pro or moviepro) to record at a higher bit rate. But they look wayyyy better than the 4k samples because these people are exporting them with a ton of compression.

It seems the standard for 4k video on h264 is 100Mbps - the iPhone uses 50Mbps, but as you say, there will probably be apps that allow you the adjust the bitrate. However, I wonder if that really makes a difference given the capabilities of the sensor in a smartphone. I guess I shouldn't pre-judge the 6S though.

I find that Youtube's VP9 compression does badly when there is a lot of animation going on across the entire scene. This is particularly evident when you shoot e.g. directly at water where there are a lot of ripples. The end result is blockiness galore. h265 doesn't have this issue, but the processing requirements of h265 are extreme. This is probably why Apple didn't use it in the iPhone (and to be fair, h265 playback is not very widely supported on Desktops).

 

[masotime]

The 6 & 6S digital/cinematic stabilization and the 6S+ with its OIS do a much better job of keeping handheld footage steady and natural looking.

Yes I think stabilization is a big deal. Video without stabilization gives me a headache when I try to look at it. I realized that all the 1080p videos taken with my iPhone 6 had great stabilization. I had the impression that in 1080p recording mode the iPhone 6 was really recording a much larger frame, and using the extra information to do real-time software stabilization.

Again, I'd like to re-iterate - if you're planning to do 4k recording, get the 6S+ instead of the 6S. The OIS, I'm sure, will make a very large difference in real world situations.

 

[karmamule]

This was my favorite iPhone 6s 4k video of those I saw on YouTube. The close-up of the leaves, the airplane flying over the field, and the nighttime scene were my favorite parts.

(watched it on a 4k TV)

 

[Skyhawk21]

No I am not wrong; before my most recent posts in this thread, my first reply to the OP of the thread was YES YOUTUBE SUCKS, YES YOUTUBE over compresses the video no matter how good the quality is, and YES YOU can see compression artifacts. In the screenshot posted from my video clip, YOU WERE LOOKING JUST FOR THE ARTIFACTS to prove a point. Hell I did not see them on YOUTUBE until you included the screenshot then I watched my video again pausing it and yes saw some compression artifacts around the edges of the wheel wells of truck that drives by. THAT'S DUE to motion and YOUTUBE not being able to handle the motion when it re-compresses it at any frame rate (ever since YouTube went live this was a problem from years ago).

TO CONCLUDE the video clips I shared today compared to all of the early release new iPhone ones with 4k video, is way better in the sense BARELY ANY artifacting can be "SEEN" unless your LOOKING FOR IT TO FIND IT. The iPhone 4k video clips uploaded recently, you do not have to look for the artifacts because even a 2 year old can see it everywhere in the frames and video without pausing it and looking for it; to include pixel noise.

No what I believe not assume is most people still do have older PC hardware if we like it or not and YouTube still uses Adobe Flash and on older systems with older browsers and hardware that cannot keep up with HD or UHD video playback, that will cause digital artifacts in itself trying to play it back at the encoded FPS and the system not keeping up, which then displays digital noise or garbage. Happens in Flash all the time with video on websites. Even with newer operating systems and YouTube using HTML5 for video playback, if your system cannot keep up it will cause any resolution video to look even worse.

No computer that is 3 years old just automatically is able to play high bit-rate video at high resolutions. Also for a smooth experience if you do have a computer and a gpu that can handle it, you need fast enough internet speed for the video stream to keep up so that the frames do not drop and cause more digital artifacts.

Overall, "YES" YouTube and how it handles any video type after being uploaded sucks and makes it look worse. Also the points above, computer hardware and software and a graphics card does play a role in how YouTube operates using Flash or HTML5. Also Internet speed plays a role to. The end result if everything is good to go in those categories, you need a screen thats calibrated and set accordingly to get the end result of 4k video looking life like!

That's all I was trying to convey, sorry I did not communicate it correctly and made it so now Apple users are out to get me!

P.S. If I wanted my own "work" to stand out or something, I have already admitted several times I am an amateur photographer/filmography and seeing this thread about sample 4k videos taken by the new iPhone and uploaded to YouTube, opened my eyes and my mind back up to the idea of having some fun as a hobby again in this field with my equipment sitting here collecting dust to include a 800+ dollar camera that happens to do 4k, besides my cell phones.

In other words no I suck at it and have nothing to gain by showing others what I have uploaded to YouTube. Although the RAW video files I have here on the PC do look much better than what YouTube could ever accomplish!

No, again your wrong. You keep writing these page long posts, but it doesn't change anything. Your VERY own video shows the exact blockyness that i am talking about. Look around the rear tire well. Block city. It doesnt matter how good your footage is, ITS YOUTUBE. Maybe your biased because you want your own work to stand out or something, but the fact is, as seen, is that every 4k video that has been posted on this page as proof in either direction has this nasty low bitrate looking crap youtube calls a 4K video.

Id also like to point of how you assume that anyone who doesnt agree with you mus have old pc hardware. Like, what does that have to do with anything? Any PC from the last 3 years should handle a 4k stream fairly well, especially such a crap looking youtube stream. Im not arguing with you about your hardware. You could have the best hardware on the planet, but that doesnt change what the finished video looks like on youtube. And when people keep saying 'this camera is better, look at this video' even though all the videos have the same issue, you would think someone would be smart enough to point out that it's not the hardware, it's about youtube compression.