Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Media Youtube Google The Media Technology

YouTube Introduces 60fps Video Support 157

jones_supa (887896) writes Google's YouTube announced that it's adding two new features that will especially benefit people who enjoy watching gameplays and those who stream games live. Most excitingly, the site is rolling out 60 frames per second video playback. The company has a handful of videos from Battlefield Hardline and Titanfall (embedded in the article) that show what 60fps playback at high definition on YouTube looks like. As the another new feature, YouTube is also offering direct funding support for content creators — name-checking sites like Kickstarter and Patreon — and is allowing fans to 'contribute money to support your channel at any time, for any reason.' Adding the icing on the cake, the website has also a number of other random little features planned, including viewer-contributed subtitles, a library of sound effects and new interactive info cards.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

YouTube Introduces 60fps Video Support

Comments Filter:
  • That's nice. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by newcastlejon ( 1483695 ) on Friday June 27, 2014 @09:42PM (#47338243)
    Now if only YT could stop defaulting to 240p on every video I play...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 27, 2014 @09:43PM (#47338247)

    People could explain something with 3 lines of text, but instead they'll make a 20 minute video about it.

    • Ted Sturgeon, is that you?

    • People could explain something with 3 lines of text, but instead they'll make a 20 minute video about it.

      100 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute. Statistics [] I'm sure you'll find something worth watching. As for explaining things in three lines of text, try it sometime with someone who has not mastered your own specialty.

      • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        As for explaining things in three lines of text, try it sometime with someone who has not mastered your own specialty.

        How about sitting through a 20 minute review of something that could be skimmed or read with far more detail?

        The problem with video is people think "it's easy" compared to say, writing it out in text. It isn't.

        In fact, to produce a video should require FAR more effort if you want to do something that's not just "hey look at this cool thing" that can be shot on a smartphone and shown in less

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

      Like TV and the internet in general most of it if crap, but there is some really good stuff too that more than offsets that. Eevblog, for example.

  • by rsmith-mac ( 639075 ) on Friday June 27, 2014 @10:58PM (#47338545)

    Unfortunately YouTube's 60fps support pokes a pretty big hole in the current state of Firefox.

    To play back 60fps videos you need to be using the HTML5 player and stream the 1080p version. The Flash player will not work here.

    The problem? Firefox doesn't support Media Source Extensions [], which is what YouTube uses for DASH adaptive streaming []. Mozilla's developers are working on the matter, but only for WebM [] for now. H.264/MP4 MSE support will have to wait.

    The end result is that 1080p60 playback works great on Chrome, Safari, and even IE11, but is all but useless on Firefox.

    I don't want to slag the Firefox devs too badly (hey, it's a free browser), but once again FOSS orthodoxy is getting in the way of practical feature development. H.264 support took an embarrassingly long time to come, and now Firefox is the only browser that that can't play back 1080p60 on YouTube.

    Between this and their constant attempts to turn Firefox into a Chrome-alike, it's getting harder and harder to justify using Firefox.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    there must be some high quality or fast video format that I am not aware of. TV shows are filmed at 29.97 FPS and movies are at 23.976 FPS.

    • Re: 60 fps? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 28, 2014 @02:18AM (#47339099)

      Before the advent of HDTV, TV shows were regularly shot at 60Hz. Sure, it may have been interlaced, but when you deinterlace to 30fps you are irreparably throwing away half of your temporal resolution. Deinterlacing to 60fps, on the other hand, creates a nice fluid video that retains all of the temporal resolution.

      • Before the advent of HDTV, TV shows were regularly shot at 60Hz.

        Uh... HDTV has nothing to do with it. Lots of shows were shot at 60Hz before, and those same kinds of shows (sports, news, "real" stuff) are still being shot at 60Hz.

    • There is lots on there. A big bit of content that'll do 60fps no problem is video games. Lots of channels that feature games in various forms. So they'll be able to show content at 60fps no issue.

      Also many AVCHD cameras do 60fps these days. It is part of the AVCHD 2.0 spec, but some like Panasonic did it before the spec update. So a lot of individuals have cameras that'll shoot 60fps no issue, and if Youtube will take it, they can upload it as is.

  • I just tried the Titanfall video on my TiVo's Youtube app and I did get 59.97 fps (TiVo is set to pass-through 1080p, and TV switches from 23.97 fps to 59.97 fps for this video).

  • by Animats ( 122034 ) on Saturday June 28, 2014 @03:29AM (#47339243) Homepage

    There's a way to do video compression so that frame rate doesn't matter. It's called Framefree. [] (PowerPoint, unfortunately). With that, you can crank up the playback frame rate as high as the output device can go.

    Framefree was developed at Kerner Optical, which was spun off from Lucasfilm. Kerner went out of business a few years ago, and although there was a web site "" and even a browser plug-in, it never caught on.

    The idea is that the intermediate frames between key frames are mesh-based morphs, rather than MPEG-type block updates. Compression is compute-intensive, and playback requires a GPU. You can generate as many intermediate frames between keyframes as you want. Intermediate frame generation means interpolating the mesh points and then warping the image pieces to fit. So not only can you have very high display frame rates, you can also have ultra-slow slow motion. No MPEG-type blockiness, either.

    While Framefree compression never caught on (probably because a high performance GPU in every set top box and DVD player was too expensive back then) the technology is used in sports programming to generate ultra-slow slow motion without using ultra-high frame rate cameras. Maybe it will make a comeback in the era of "4K" video with 60FPS frame rates.

    • Wow, that sounds quite cool.
    • While it presumably does help to have some nice clean mesh data from the original video, decompressed video can be interpolated pretty well by modern TVs. Sure, it fails at high speeds, but presumably Framefree wouldn't get it right under all circumstances either.

      In any case, if you don't have a real input frame at the chosen moment of time, whatever gets displayed is going to be an estimation however you do it. Sending real 60fps video is always going to win out over interpolating 30fps, so to say "frame r

  • When I open or do a search, Firefox hangs for 90 seconds while loading the page. When playing a video, moving the playback point usually results in a black screen. Playback stutters way too often.

    • This. Youtube isn't much good for watching anything other than short clips because it will often stop playing in the middle of a video, and be unrecoverable without reloading the whole page, and then you have to search for where you were. I have a fast connection, Netflix and other video sites have no problems. I can download a 2 hour movie in 10 minutes on bit torrent. But for some reason Youtube can't play 360p videos properly.
  • Hell has frozen over. I've been anticipating standard 60fps support on Youtube for years and it's finally come. My bitterness is gradually fading...

    I wonder if existing videos at 60fps already on Youtube will be adjusted to support the feature.
  • How about some 50fps videos? Actually, I'd settle for 25fps.
    • These days most LCD panels are 60Hz, so it makes sense to go with 60fps.
      • No, that doesn't make sense - not if your source video is 50fps (I assume GP was asking for it in addition to 60fps, not instead of). If your input video is 50fps, you should keep it at 50fps. You won't make it look any better on a 60Hz panel just by converting it to 60fps (unless you're going to do some fancy motion-compensation thing, which I doubt YouTube will, and will in any case not work brilliantly all the time), and in fact you'll end up making it worse on at any other display frequency, including 5

  • Ubuntu 14.04 still only plays at 10 FPS in full screen mode. Bastards. Every streaming video site *except* YouTube plays flawlessly in full screen mode.

What this country needs is a good five cent ANYTHING!