bad dsl connection

Started Jun 13, 2012 | Discussions thread
Scott Eaton Senior Member • Posts: 2,217
overstating video bandwidth

Look at the file sizes produced by newer cameras. Heck, a typical .mov file (already compressed and encoded using h.264) from a newer Canon model eats up around 50MB of space for a 10 second video

Not sure where you're getting these numbers Jim, but using dSLR capture as a reference for video streaming is like using floppy disk access times as a reference for SSD.

Blu Ray quality bandwidth is typically less than 40mbps, and iTunes is broadcasting at far less than 10mbps for 1080p, and people have a hard time seeing the difference. In theory a 6mbps DSL connection is more than sufficient pipe for 1080p video streaming, but as you mentioned you aren't going to get sustained xfer rates. It typically requires 2x-4x the bandwidth because of issues with your ISP throttling the connection.

When you pay more to your ISP for a faster connection they are not ordering better hardware for you in a server room somewhere. What typically happens is your traffic gets a priority over the guy down the street paying for lesser bandwidth. Only when they get everybody on the higher paying plans and complaints arise because everybody is fighting for the connection will they upgrade their gear, put in better fiber switches etc. At that point it becomes a problem for the provider that's servicing their backbone. The bottleneck just moves upstream. At least with a lowly T-1 I'm getting guaranteed QoS.

As for dSLRs, I don't know any that are even close to Blue Ray quality without resorting to RAW capture via HDMI, and then further compression. Default compression and 4:4:2 sampling with current dSLRs is so wretchedly bad compared to broadcast 1080p H.264 it's laughable. I've found I can knock down my 60D capture to less than 3mbps and not see a difference.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow