kantana: HD video - 4/29/12 - Technical Support

Forums / Technical Support

HD video

Add to List

Add Reply

Forum Topics

Online Models

Sarah Roux

Visit My Room

Andromeda Cute

Visit My Room

Molly Chase

Visit My Room

Evelyn Sweeet

Visit My Room

Technical Support: HD video

Created by: kantana

4/29/12 @ 5:08am (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: cape town, south afica
Posts: 13

Report Abuse

Why is it that some models that are listed as HD, have what can only be described as poor quality.
The jerkiness I can understand as being internet. But the quality is as if watching a VHS movie on a HD screen.
It can't be that they are in some remote site, as sometime a model from the same area has better quality even though listed as standard quality.
Thanks

Quote

Created by: VS_Brad

4/30/12 @ 10:14am (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: California, USA
Posts: 3,429

Report Abuse

Why is it that some models that are listed as HD, have what can only be described as poor quality.

At present the HD designation is based on the video codec used to stream the live video. Unfortunately there is still some disparity in some rooms (regardless of codec) in terms of the quality of the stream. We're working on several fronts to continue to improve the video and audio quality.

The jerkiness I can understand as being internet. But the quality is as if watching a VHS movie on a HD screen.

It could be the performer's camera, their computer hardware or their Internet connection. All three play a role in the quality of the stream.

It can't be that they are in some remote site, as sometime a model from the same area has better quality even though listed as standard quality.

Even performers in the same geographic area (or location) can produce varying quality of video based on the three items I listed above. Like I said, we're continuing to work on improving the overall quality ... our push to have our performers broadcast the best quality video possible never ends.

Brad

Quote

Created by: kantana

5/1/12 @ 4:19am (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: cape town, south afica
Posts: 13

Report Abuse

Thx for the reply. much appreciated.

Quote

Created by: purgatory

5/1/12 @ 11:30pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00

Report Abuse

I have to agree the video quality in a lot of rooms has taken a nosedive, to the point it is worse than the Java old chat.. Not sure what is going on recently but I think some admin should go round some of the rooms and tell the models how to setup their performer apps correctly.

I also think the other reason this problem has appeared is due to some models working many sites at once and using cam splitting software that distroys the video quality too and they have to lower the bandwidth to each site they are on to make sure their internet does not fall over.

Some rooms are just huge blocks moving around and they are like watching a pacman game it's that blocky. Worse part they advertise the rooms as premiere and HD.

Brad also some of the rooms I speak off had amazing video in the past but as I said they are working many sites at once and having to reduce the quality settings to stop their internet dropping.

I understand the hardware issues and the other facts you state as you know i'm in I.T too, but some of the rooms that had amazing video are using top end camcorders with top end capture cards and they look worse than an early laptop with the first webcam in them. It's nothing to do with codecs or hardware in most of the rooms or even internet bandwidth, the problem is cam splitting software and working many sites at once. I think some of flirt4frees ground rules have to be looked at and set some minimum requirements for video quality and especially in the premiere/HD rooms. Otherwise performers/studios will take the micky this way and run on 100's of sites at once and only have a single blocky pixel moving around the screen and they will call the room premiere/HD. (Then you have the performers wondering why no customers are tipping or going private)....

Regards

Nabil

Quote

Created by: lickau

5/3/12 @ 6:45am (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: Moving slowly but surely somewhere sometime
Posts: 29,285

Report Abuse

Some of the videos it is hard to tell anything when the model moves .
Looks like old 8 mm films or the cams from early 1990s .

1 room looked like all was made of lego blocks and very pixelated that the model's features were blurred and looked almost unrecognizable .
Her room was great video only a couple weeks ago .

Quote

Created by: ronnie-uk

5/3/12 @ 8:00pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,381

Report Abuse

Good to see this topic being raised here.

I have mentioned it a few times in connection with Group Chat, most recently at post #99 in the MP forum topic Group Chat: Comments, Experiences and Advice:

http://www.flirt4free.com/forums/threads.php?forum_id=5&thread_id=12585&pg=5

Hate to see lovely models lose Group Chat (and pvt) customers because of picture quality issues. Many models get it just right. There must be scope for VS to find out more about their successful setups and settings, and then advise on best practice for the benefit of the others.

If models degrade their video quality by site-sharing, as suggested by Nabil here, they should lose their HD status. :twocents

Quote

Created by: spar

5/3/12 @ 8:35pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Posts: 346

Report Abuse

Is it advisable to warn in time delay fashion when a party or group show commences? That way I will have time to vacate the room before I get frozen up. Same, to give forwarning when a party or group attempt ends.
A power meter or value assigned to advertize if a model is working many sites, and the more sites worked on the lower the rating.
Most of all to give us warning that an assine bot is there to pretend to chat with us?

Quote

Created by: .jeffie.

5/3/12 @ 9:09pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Report Abuse

There must be scope for VS to find out more about their successful setups and settings, and then advise on best practice for the benefit of the others

I'm not sure Ronnie. What is best practice in one particular situation may not neccessarily be best practice in another situation. There is a huge variation in computers, cameras and internet connections being used by different models

If models degrade their video quality by site-sharing, as suggested by Nabil here, they should lose their HD status. :twocents

Again I'm not sure. The HD designation is based on the video codec used to stream the live video, and I don't think this method can recognize if the video is streaming to multiple sites

Quote

Created by: .jeffie.

5/11/12 @ 9:06pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Report Abuse

One thing I've noticed recently about some rooms where the video quality is poor and the model is simulcasting - quite often the video on the other sites is perfect!

Of course the only reason I visited these otherwise inferior sites was to investigate this problem :angel

Quote

Created by: ronnie-uk

5/12/12 @ 5:26pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,381

Report Abuse

I'm not sure Ronnie. What is best practice in one particular situation may not neccessarily be best practice in another situation. There is a huge variation in computers, cameras and internet connections being used by different models

You may be right, Jeffie, but I still think there is some scope for "optimum" settings.

Firstly, I was at a Group Chat the other day with a model I often visit - with no video problems. This time his picture was exceptionally clear, but really jerky. I mentioned it to him, and he did something. His picture was not quite so clear but it was very good quality and it was smooth. I felt like saying "remember that setting".

Secondly, I have seen programs and sites where I can change a quality/speed setting from 128 kbs, 256 kbs, 512 kbs, 1024 kbs etc. The lower setting is poor quality but smooth. The higher setting is high quality but jerky. 512 kbs seems to work best for me. I would have thought that VS could recommend a comparable setting that works best for the greatest number of performers and members.

Just my :twocents

Quote

Created by: ronnie-uk

6/21/12 @ 6:36pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,381

Report Abuse

I said earlier in this thread that getting the picture and video quality just right can make the difference between whether or not a model is successful at Group Chat.

I think it can actually determine whether or not a model is successful on Flirt4Free. That is how important it is. I don't think any model with a consistently blurry picture (too low quality) or consistently jerky video stream (possibly too high quality) manages to be very successful.

I never have any picture/video problems when I visit any of the top models. I get great picture/video quality with the Russian and Colombian studio models. When I get a blurry or jerky picture/video I am therefore pretty sure the problem is on the model's side.

One very hot model, who I want to do a number of shows with, can't get this right. I think he is about to give up, and that is such a pity.

Quote

Created by: trunder

6/21/12 @ 8:57pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Posts: 175

Report Abuse

Quote

Created by: trunder

6/21/12 @ 8:58pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Posts: 175

Report Abuse

Yeah, right lol :angel

or devil

Quote

Created by: ronnie-uk

7/12/12 @ 5:03pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,381

Report Abuse

bump

Quote

Created by: ronnie-uk

9/1/12 @ 9:59pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,381

Report Abuse

I never have any picture/video problems when I visit any of the top models. I get great picture/video quality with the Russian and Colombian studio models. When I get a blurry or jerky picture/video I am therefore pretty sure the problem is on the model's side.

Bumping this again, to repeat this comment I made earlier.

Amanda's latest topic confirms that many of the video problems are on the model's side, and that they can usually fix it with help from VS. I still think there is scope for VS to do more to let all models know which settings work best.

A new suggestion: I also think VS could have some (free) test VODs here of different quality (eg kbits/sec) so that members can easily confirm that their side of things (PC - Flash - browser -ISP - broadband - F4F) is working OK and can handle the range of (recommended) settings used by the models.

Quote

Created by: toringray

9/1/12 @ 11:24pm (EDT) | UTC - 4:00

Report Abuse

I have found that the issues with video quality for the most part is on the models side of the equation.

I seems to me that the video codex compensates for poor conditions by lowering the frame rate and streaming out the video data at a lower rate, achieving this lower rate by pixelating the image more and more in direct relation to amount of compensation needed.

Almost always when I see poor video quality, the model is on a laptop and is connected to the Internet via a wireless connection. Most times an older laptop and with the older wireless speeds.

The wireless is the biggest cause of poor video. Every model that I have seen using a laptop that has good quality video is using a direct (wired) connection to their Internet router.

jerky and or pausing video most times is because the machine they are using is not able to keep up encoding the video and streaming it out. To keep video and sound synced, the codex has to drop frames.

Poor lighting often will cause the picture to become pixelated as most cameras are very poor at creating a good image in low light and the codex cant compensate for that very well.

A lot of times, the model is also running other software on the pc that is streaming the video. They have many social media programs running (sky pe and YM for example) and often are streaming music or videos at the same time (porno). On a weak machine, this will cause jerky video as the processor can't keep up.

The final thing that most models overlook is their upload speed. I have asked models with poor quality video what their upload speed is and they always quote me the download speed. I tell then, no, what is the upload speed and have them check it on speed test .net and it almost always is slower than 1m, often only 200-500k.. As soon as they upgrade the UPLOAD speed, their video quality improves 100 fold.

I have to guess that the site provides the models with this information but it's not 'enforced' that a certain level of broadcast quality is maintained which is a shame because it would go a long way to improving members perception of this site if they did.

I hope this helps some.

Quote

Created by: bisporti23

9/2/12 @ 1:45am (EDT) | UTC - 4:00
Location: Germany
Posts: 455

Report Abuse

I hope this helps some.

Torin, great to have another tech-whizz like Nabil(=Purgatory), who helped me a lot to fix issues on my end, aboard.

:thumbsup

Bisport

Quote

Online Models

Sarah Roux

Visit My Room

Andromeda Cute

Visit My Room

Molly Chase

Visit My Room

Evelyn Sweeet

Visit My Room

Amount:This is the tool tip for the Amount	(Be sure to send this exact amount)	Click to Copy the Address
Address:This is the tool tip for the Address		Click to Copy the Address

Forums / Technical Support

HD video

Add to List

Current Default Price:

50 Credits

Model Messages

Your Screen Name:

Notification Settings

Inbox

Sasha Elite

Recommended

Sasha Elite

All Models

Sasha Elite

Sasha Elite

Recommended

Sasha Elite

Suggested Usernames:

:

Amount:
Exchange Rate:
BTC Amount:
Network Cost:
Total to Send:

Member Login

Not a member?

New User Tutorial Video

Forums / Technical Support

HD video

Add to List

Current Default Price:

50 Credits

Model Messages

Your Screen Name:

Notification Settings

Inbox

Sasha Elite

Recommended

Sasha Elite

All Models

Sasha Elite

Sasha Elite

Recommended

Sasha Elite

Search For Customer

Set Custom Pricing For Specific Customers

Photo Preview

Set Price

Add Description

Video Preview

Set Price

Add Description

Select Reason

Need help? Report an Issue

Technical & Other Issues:

Drag and drop an image, or Browse images

Success

Suggested Usernames:

: